From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rainer Stengele Subject: Bug? Non org timestamp in a todo is interpreted as timestamp in agenda view Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:05:26 +0200 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:40714) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R36Co-0008S5-PF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 09:05:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R36Cj-00080p-AE for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 09:05:46 -0400 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:36875) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R36Cj-00080e-0M for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 09:05:41 -0400 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R36Ch-0002qd-9w for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:05:39 +0200 Received: from 212.34.176.74 ([212.34.176.74]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:05:39 +0200 Received: from rainer.stengele by 212.34.176.74 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:05:39 +0200 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 Hi all Having a todo like this: **** INARBEIT Test 2011/06/10 00:00:00 SCHEDULED: <2011-09-12 Mo> results in this agenda entry: ADMIN: 0:00...... Scheduled: INARBEIT Test 2011/06/10 :00 The time stamp "2011/06/10 00:00:00", neither an active nor an inactive org timestamp, because neither "<>" nor "[]" is used, is interpreted as time stamp and used strangely in the agenda entry, showing up as if the entry was clocked at 0:00 o'clock. This looks like unintended behaviour!? Best, Rainer