From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:19:57 +0000 Message-ID: <87abllcrhu.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <47C48C56.6050206@gmail.com> <1F133D29-7823-413B-92D3-2B1844D8F507@science.uva.nl> <47C582C3.4090405@gmail.com> <873arexu8b.fsf@gollum.intra.norang.ca> <871w6x7tsz.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <47C616FC.3030009@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JUfry-0002jP-Q6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 05:20:07 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JUfrw-0002in-It for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 05:20:06 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JUfrw-0002ih-9a for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 05:20:04 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JUfrv-0004pM-Ra for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 05:20:04 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so235684ugf.48 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 02:20:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (Carsten Dominik's message of "Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:09:29 +0100") 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: Carsten Dominik Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Carsten Dominik writes: > On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:05 AM, Wanrong Lin wrote: >> >> For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to >> have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it >> would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be >> even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates >> a strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and >> hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack >> of real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit >> puzzling to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly >> scheduled, while plain time stamp item may or may not be something >> that needs to take actions on (as it could be just an event). > > Hmmm, lets discuss this for a while. It looks like there are two questions here: whether we should have a dedicated syntax for appointments, distinct from active timestamps, and whether we should allow warnings on other timestamps than deadline ones. (Maybe a good thing to keep these issue separate as long as possible.) I don't feel the need of a new APPOINTMENT keyword, or a SCHEDULED@ one, because I'm using timestamps like this: - active timestamps for appointments; - SCHEDULED timestamps for items that (1) need to remain in the agenda when they are not DONE, and (2) I don't need to be warned about; - DEADLINE for everything else that I need to attach a date with. I guess this setup is somewhat counter-intuitive for newcomers, since the semantic of SCHEDULED makes you believe this is what you need for most tasks. But I think this semantic is somewhat misleading. With the setup above, I tend to use more and more active timestamps and deadlines. The need for a scheduled item is very rare, since the two specific features of SCHEDULED is that I won't be warned about such tasks and I will be able to find them with `org-check-before-date'... So, rather than introducing a new keyword, I'd better get rid of them and redefine timestamps like this: [2008-02-28 jeu] Inactive timestamp <2008-02-28 jeu> Active timestamp {2008-02-28 jeu} Interactive timestamp By "interactive", I mean that those timestamps would be aware of `org-deadline-warning-days' and other variables like this one, or be able to stay in the agenda if the associated task is not DONE, etc. For exemple: {2008-02-28 jeu -10d} => Warn 10 days before {2008-02-28 jeu -10d--+2d} => Warn 10 days before and 2 days after, if not DONE Active timestamp would also use this syntax, but for the purpose of defining *time spans*, not pre- and post-reminders. For example: <2008-02-18 jeu +3d> => Define an appointment for a meeting between 2008-02-28 and 2008-02-21. I'm aware that this change would require a careful redefinition of the use of "scheduled" and "deadline" in variable names and in the manual, but I think that it would finally help simplifying things a bit. In a sense, relying spontaneous understanding that people have of the words "SCHEDULED" and "DEADLINE" can be a bit dangerous -- or simply assumes too much about the normal use of those kinds of timestamps. -- Bastien