Hi Ben, Thanks for your detailed response. Your arguments make perfect sense. Let me try to get into the habit of "scheduling" and putting "deadlines". It's all a question of learning new habits and sticking to it. Regards, Jose bva@alexanderonline.org wrote: > Hi Jose, > > I'm also still very much a rookie, in GTD and in org-mode. But I'd > argue against added one more way to add something to the agenda time > grid. Things show up in the time grid if > 1) you use C-c C-s (adds SCHEDULED: property to headline) > 2) you use C-c C-d (adds DEADLINE: property to headline) > 3) you use C-u C-c . (inserts timestamp at point; headline will show > up in agenda) > > As a novice, I've come to the belief that these multiple ways of > 'scheduling' (I mean only that a line of text is added to the agenda) > have grown organically from org-mode's past, by not dropping an older, > simpler way, but adding a new mechanism for a specific type of > time-management problem. Each one has its own small differences in how > it interacts with other features of org-mode to support the specific > issue it addresses (deadlines show up in red, e.g.) > > I offer the following thoughts quite humbly, knowing that I'm likely > among the least effective time-manager and org-mode user on this list. > > > In response to your concerns > a) no need to type extra characters > response: perhaps you could try the commands listed above. You only > need to type the time-range, and org-mode fills in the rest > > b) no need to clutter up with the date > response: SCHEDULED and DEADLINE properties can be folded under the > headline (in fact, they can be put into the PROPERTY drawer, if you'd > really like to hide them. And there's no extra date verbage in the > time grid (and I think there is a customization for removing the word > 'Scheduled' if you don't like it, but I haven't decided to dislike it > *that* much. It's the default and I trust it's there for a good reason) > > c) if I miss it today, it'll show up tomorrow > response: So if you've missed washing the dog today at 9:56, why > should that task be automatically rescheduled for tomorrow *at the > exact same time*. If missing the appointed time and date doesn't > prevent you from doing that task, then perhaps you could make it a > TODO item that shows up on the global todo list instead. If you > actually did the task, but didn't get around to changing your > headline, then it's there for you to deal with inappropriately. > > Oh, and if you have a normal date+timestamp, then you find the > headline and hit S- to move the day forward by one, so the > manual rescheduling isn't hard either. So if you glance at > yesterday's agenda, and see something in the wrong place, it's easy to > move forward. This works in the agenda, in the org-mode buffer, and > you only need to get point somewhere inside or next to the timestamp > (I use C-u C-u alot, which isn't very precise, so I appreciate > that I don't have to get the point to a specific character) > > I hope you like key-board shortcuts (or you're going to go crazy with > emacs, much less org-mode!) > > Respectfully yours, > > Ben > > On 2008-04-10 Thu, at 16:35, emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org wrote: >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 08:09:21 -0700 >> From: Jose Robins >> Subject: Re: [Orgmode] Agenda view for logging? >> To: "Joel J. Adamson" >> Cc: org-mode >> Message-ID: <47FE2DA1.3060109@yahoo.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> >> Joel J. Adamson wrote: >>> Carsten Dominik writes: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Jose, Manish >>>> >>>> I don't really think that it would be reasonable to make any entry >>>> that contains a string that looks like a time show up in the agenda. >>>> >>> >>> I think I missed part of this conversation. If I put >>> >>> ** Wash the dog <2008-04-10 09:56 > >>> >>> in one of my org-agenda-files, it shows up at 9:56 in the agenda >>> time-grid. Is this not the intended behavior? >>> >>> Joel >>> >>> >> Yes, that is intended behavior and it works fine. The question was >> whether a time range without a time-stamp would work as well. something >> like... >> >> ** 9:55 am - 10:15 am wash the dog >> - would put this task in "today's" agenda view. >> >> I see Carsten's point about not wanting to recognize any arbitrary text >> string which looks like a time to be considered a >> "time-of-specification". A possible compromise is to have a string which >> looks like "<10:15-10:30> " to be considered as a task for today which >> appears @ the appropriate time in the agenda view. The beauty is that >> (a) you avoid having to type in extra keystrokes to schedule it, (b) no >> need to clutter with an additional date and (c) if it doesn't get done >> or something, when I do the agenda view tomorrow, it shows up there as >> well and it doesn't get lost. >> >> Of course, I may be asking for things that may have other negative >> implications, since after all, I'm still a rookie with org mode (still >> wet behind the ears) and maybe there are better approaches to this. :-) >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-orgmode/attachments/20080410/156bb882/attachment.html >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> End of Emacs-orgmode Digest, Vol 26, Issue 23 >> ********************************************* > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >