From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: clocktable and ISO week Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:34:42 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87skn48ms6.wl%bremner@pivot.cs.unb.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LS5sn-0001a6-DT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:34:49 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LS5sl-0001Yi-Pu for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:34:49 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40322 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LS5sl-0001Yd-KS for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:34:47 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f20.google.com ([209.85.219.20]:61755) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LS5sk-0007Xf-RU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:34:47 -0500 Received: by ewy13 with SMTP id 13so2740106ewy.18 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:34:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87skn48ms6.wl%bremner@pivot.cs.unb.ca> 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: David Bremner Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Jan 27, 2009, at 10:24 PM, David Bremner wrote: > I have a clocktable that begins like this. > > #+BEGIN: clocktable :maxlevel 2 :block 2009-W05 :scope agenda-with- > archives > Clock summary at [2009-01-27 Tue 17:15], for week 2009-W04. > > [contents snipped] > > #+END: > > Whatever week I put in :block, it puts one less in the title. > It seems actually gather the clock data from the right week, but the > title is wrong? Or I misunderstand something as usual :-). > > I tried emacs22 and emacs23 (emacs-snapshot on debian) and org-mode > 6.19b (6.17c was the same IIRC). Well, what you have not tried is making this table on a Monday, in which case it would have worked just fine... :-) Thanks, fixed now. - Carsten