From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Finney Subject: Feature request: Periodic events based on count of specific weekdays (was: Monthly events based on count of specific weekdays) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:43:27 +1100 Message-ID: <87vdh6gmpc.fsf_-_@benfinney.id.au> References: <87ws214lpo.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <87fx8p434f.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <87bpjc4u4i.fsf@benfinney.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NBFjD-0006uL-Qd for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:43:51 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NBFjA-0006sf-0N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:43:51 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50713 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NBFj9-0006sZ-LR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:43:47 -0500 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:40526) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NBFj9-0002ss-0u for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:43:47 -0500 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1NBFj5-0002Ov-Mv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:43:43 +0100 Received: from eth595.vic.adsl.internode.on.net ([150.101.214.82]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:43:43 +0100 Received: from ben+emacs by eth595.vic.adsl.internode.on.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:43:43 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Ben Finney writes: > […] “second Tuesday of the month” isn't niche, it is pretty common, I > would have thought. […] > > You'd have to ask Carsten to implement a new timestamp syntax. What > > would you propose as a more readable designation? How about a keyword that specifies the type of repeat being requested: <2009-10-13 Tue 14:00 +1m dow> Repeat each month, on the second Tuesday of the month. Calculated because this date is the second Tuesday of the month, and “dow” is the specified repeat type. <2009-10-13 Tue 14:00 +1m dom> Repeat each month, on the 13th day of the month. Calculated because this date is the 13th of the month, and “dom” is the specified repeat type. <2009-10-13 Tue 14:00 +1m> Repeat each month, on the 13th day of the month. Calculated because this date is the 13th of the month, and “dom” is the default repeat type. This allows existing behaviour to be continued (“repeat on the same day of the month”), preserves the default behaviour, and allows for other repeat types to be added later without breaking existing timestamp data. -- \ “He who laughs last, thinks slowest.” —anonymous | `\ | _o__) | Ben Finney