From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric S Fraga <ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Newbie Questions
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:26:11 +0100
Message-ID: <87bpnstv8s.wl%ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk>
References: <4A565502.1000808@up.edu>	<9547.1247195772@gamaville.dokosmarshall.org>	<4A56BEBF.2080702@up.edu>
Reply-To: e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MPHzb-00050R-Rz
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:26:31 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MPHzX-0004yI-5V
	for Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:26:31 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52385 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MPHzX-0004yD-2x
	for Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:26:27 -0400
Received: from vscane-c.ucl.ac.uk ([144.82.108.43]:40001)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk>) id 1MPHzW-0008UT-JO
	for Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:26:26 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4A56BEBF.2080702@up.edu>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: "Andrew M. Nuxoll" <nuxoll@up.edu>
Cc: Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

At Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:08:31 -0700,
Andrew M. Nuxoll wrote:
> In my mind, there is no conflict between scheduling and deadlining.

I agree with you on this point but, in this case, it makes sense for
both aspects to be highlighted in the agenda view.  I would suggest
that you might wish to change (reduce) the warning period for the
deadline when you schedule an item or alternatively not schedule an
item but simply assign an appointment date/time (i.e. an active time
stamp) to it for when you want to work on the task.  The latter is
what I do in many cases.

eric