From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: [new exporter] adhere org-export-date-timestamp-format? Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:54:49 +0100 Message-ID: <87fw1ib535.fsf@pank.eu> References: <877gpj3raa.fsf@pank.eu> <87623stdza.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87bod2637u.fsf@gmail.com> <8738yeh6ts.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87wqvm2x3f.fsf@gmail.com> <87sj6ai8gx.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87k3rm2q03.fsf@gmail.com> <87vcb6qkdj.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <8762321vw4.fsf@gmail.com> <87a9se794l.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <871ud2nxri.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44733) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U0hUr-0005y2-Ji for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:55:18 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U0hUe-0001uX-4E for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:55:17 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:38312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U0hUd-0001tw-U7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:55:04 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U0hUt-0005yi-Ml for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:55:19 +0100 Received: from 192.167.90.133 ([192.167.90.133]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:55:19 +0100 Received: from rasmus by 192.167.90.133 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:55:19 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: q > Hello, > > Bastien writes: > >>> Though, I think I have to withdraw my proposal about using #+DATE: >>> value >>> as a time format string. Indeed, date value, along with any >>> document >>> property, is parsed, which defeats the purpose of using it as a >>> format >>> string. >>> >>> We can still implement a convenient macro to handle timestamps in >>> date >>> keyword. >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> Up to whatever you find more practical. > > I have added `org-e-latex-date-format', which can be set to a time > format string. When the #+DATE: value consists in a single timestamp, > it > will be applied to format that timestamp. Otherwise it will be > ignored. Very cool! I'll check it. -- When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?