FR: Repeated time stamp, jumping from current time

FR: Repeated time stamp, jumping from current time

[Wanrong Lin]

Hi,

Right now we can have a repeated time stamp like this:

* TODO Do this every month
  SCHEDULED: <2008-03-01 Sat +1m>

If I am late and mark the above done on 2008-03-05, the time stamp will 
automatically jump to 2008-04-01. This is very useful for things like 
paying monthly bills.

However, for some tasks, it would make more sense to jump from the date 
when it is marked done, not from when it is scheduled to be done. An 
example is changing my furnace filter. I am supposed to change it once a 
month, but if I am late for 10 days, the next date to change should be 
30 days away, not 20 days away.

Maybe we can use a syntax like this to indicate that:

<2008-03-01 Sat +=1m>

Any comments? Thank you.

Wanrong

Re: FR: Repeated time stamp, jumping from current time

[Piotr Zielinski]

On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:52 AM, Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>  Right now we can have a repeated time stamp like this:
>
>  * TODO Do this every month
>   SCHEDULED: <2008-03-01 Sat +1m>
>
>  If I am late and mark the above done on 2008-03-05, the time stamp will
>  automatically jump to 2008-04-01. This is very useful for things like
>  paying monthly bills.
>
>  However, for some tasks, it would make more sense to jump from the date
>  when it is marked done, not from when it is scheduled to be done.

Here are my thoughts on the issue:

I think of SCHEDULED as my personal plan to start doing something at a
specified time.  In this interpretation, having something scheduled
for the past does not make sense, or more precisely, it should be
functionally equivalent to scheduling it for "now" (except that it
reminds you that you're behind schedule).  Therefore, I'd vote for
jumping from the current date, not from the time in the SCHEDULED
timestamp.

Your example of paying a bill is, in my view, a DEADLINE, an
externally imposed requirement.  Since whomever imposed the deadline
on you does not care about your personal scheduling, the jumping in
deadlines should be from the time indicated in the timestamp.

Thanks,
Piotr

 An
>  example is changing my furnace filter. I am supposed to change it once a
>  month, but if I am late for 10 days, the next date to change should be
>  30 days away, not 20 days away.
>
>  Maybe we can use a syntax like this to indicate that:
>
>  <2008-03-01 Sat +=1m>
>
>  Any comments? Thank you.
>
>  Wanrong
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>  Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>  Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>  http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>

Re: FR: Repeated time stamp, jumping from current time

[Wanrong Lin]

I think even if it is not a deadline, just personal scheduled stuff (no 
"external force") , there are cases where you just want to do things 
periodically at a certain date/time, so we should keep the old behavior. 
We don't have to choose between these two (jumping from current date and 
jumping from the scheduled date). We can just add a new feature.
> Here are my thoughts on the issue:
>
> I think of SCHEDULED as my personal plan to start doing something at a
> specified time.  In this interpretation, having something scheduled
> for the past does not make sense, or more precisely, it should be
> functionally equivalent to scheduling it for "now" (except that it
> reminds you that you're behind schedule).  Therefore, I'd vote for
> jumping from the current date, not from the time in the SCHEDULED
> timestamp.
>
> Your example of paying a bill is, in my view, a DEADLINE, an
> externally imposed requirement.  Since whomever imposed the deadline
> on you does not care about your personal scheduling, the jumping in
> deadlines should be from the time indicated in the timestamp.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
>  An
>   
>>  example is changing my furnace filter. I am supposed to change it once a
>>  month, but if I am late for 10 days, the next date to change should be
>>  30 days away, not 20 days away.
>>
>>  Maybe we can use a syntax like this to indicate that:
>>
>>  <2008-03-01 Sat +=1m>
>>
>>  Any comments? Thank you.
>>
>>  Wanrong
>>
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>>  Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>>  Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>>  http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>>
>>     

Re: FR: Repeated time stamp, jumping from current time

[Rainer Stengele]

Wanrong Lin schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Right now we can have a repeated time stamp like this:
> 
> * TODO Do this every month
>  SCHEDULED: <2008-03-01 Sat +1m>
> 
> If I am late and mark the above done on 2008-03-05, the time stamp will
> automatically jump to 2008-04-01. This is very useful for things like
> paying monthly bills.
> 
> However, for some tasks, it would make more sense to jump from the date
> when it is marked done, not from when it is scheduled to be done. An
> example is changing my furnace filter. I am supposed to change it once a
> month, but if I am late for 10 days, the next date to change should be
> 30 days away, not 20 days away.
> 
> Maybe we can use a syntax like this to indicate that:
> 
> <2008-03-01 Sat +=1m>
> 
> Any comments? Thank you.
> 
> Wanrong
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
> 

Hi,

I also have this situation.
Checking for example my fire detectors batteries monthly I do not want to jump to a past date when I forgot to check the last two months and toggle to DONE today.

***** TODO Test Brandmelder [0/4] - Durchführung dokumentieren !!!								    :@HOME:
      SCHEDULED: <2008-03-01 Sa +1m>

Rainer

Re: FR: Repeated time stamp, jumping from current time

[Carsten Dominik]

On Mar 2, 2008, at 5:52 AM, Wanrong Lin wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Right now we can have a repeated time stamp like this:
>
> * TODO Do this every month
> SCHEDULED: <2008-03-01 Sat +1m>
>
> If I am late and mark the above done on 2008-03-05, the time stamp  
> will automatically jump to 2008-04-01. This is very useful for  
> things like paying monthly bills.
>
> However, for some tasks, it would make more sense to jump from the  
> date when it is marked done, not from when it is scheduled to be  
> done. An example is changing my furnace filter. I am supposed to  
> change it once a month, but if I am late for 10 days, the next date  
> to change should be 30 days away, not 20 days away.
>
> Maybe we can use a syntax like this to indicate that:
>
> <2008-03-01 Sat +=1m>

This is a good idea, along with Rainers version of it.

I have just pushed a change into the git repo which has two new
ways to write the repeater cookie:

++1w  will shift the date by at least one week, but also by as
       many weeks as needed to make sure that the next date lies
       in the future.

.+1w  will shift the date to 1 week from the moment when you mark the
       entry DONE.

Thanks for these useful ideas, Wanrong and Rainer.

- Carsten