From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thorsten Jolitz Subject: Re: Timestamps - anything goes? Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:39:45 +0100 Message-ID: <87ppn8xr3i.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87y51xbebn.fsf@gmail.com> <87lhxxgxl9.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87ob2tbah6.fsf@gmail.com> <87lhxxfezv.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51179) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W9DNS-0002WS-A7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:39:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W9DNM-0000jK-B9 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:39:22 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:41104) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W9DNM-0000j0-4W for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:39:16 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W9DNJ-0006sX-DE for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:39:13 +0100 Received: from g231235211.adsl.alicedsl.de ([92.231.235.211]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:39:13 +0100 Received: from tjolitz by g231235211.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:39:13 +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 Bastien writes: Hi Bastien, > Thorsten Jolitz writes: > >> 1. can deadlines be time-ranges? > > No. > >> 2. in time-ranges, can both entries have repeaters? > > No. > >> 3. can deadline and closed have repeaters? > > No. > >> 4. are any combinations of deadline and scheduled valid? > > Yes! Thanks, I had similar ideas but wanted to hear another opinion for reinsurance. >> i.e. I want to find out which timestamp-attributes are (or should be) >> neve used for which planning-element, and which combinations of these >> elements are (or should be) strictly forbidden. > This does not really tell why, but maybe it's a secret :) Sort of ... maybe more info in the future ;) -- cheers, Thorsten