From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Bug: "SCHEDULED: " positioning is fragile [7.8.06 (release_7.8.06.181.ga481)] Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 13:01:13 +0200 Message-ID: <877gxpyxs6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <871uo1l37g.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58449) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SHCKG-0008SV-Qo for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 07:00:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SHCKF-0004eg-0n for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 07:00:00 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:38984) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SHCKE-0004eV-NY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 06:59:58 -0400 Received: by wgbdr1 with SMTP id dr1so2848957wgb.30 for ; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 03:59:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Dave Abrahams's message of "Fri, 06 Apr 2012 08:18:12 -0400") 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: Dave Abrahams Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Dave Abrahams writes: >>> Given the following: >>> >>> * TODO Some headline >>> SCHEDULED: <2012-04-05 Thu> >>> >>> If I add body text between the headline and the SCHEDULED: line, some >>> things work, but others don't. >> >> See this footnote in the section "8.3.1 Inserting deadlines or >> schedules" of the manual: >> >> (1) The `SCHEDULED' and `DEADLINE' dates are inserted on the line >> right below the headline. Don't put any text between this line and the >> headline. > > That doesn't make it right. No, but it makes it clear that users should put SCHEDULED: <...> lines right after the headline. > This is a serious usability bug and a newbie trap. > > As I mentioned in my report, if some of the commands can handle it, > there's no reason all of them shouldn't handle it. > The only other valid interpretation is that those commands that are > handling it as I expect are broken and they're changing things that > should really be treated as body text and just happen to look like a > SCHEDULED line. Patch welcome. Or even more useful: write a small function that goes an Org buffer and spot misformatted subtrees, offering to fix them interactively. Can you write this? Thanks, -- Bastien