Re: Is this proper time format?

[Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net>]

David Masterson <dsmasterson@gmail.com> writes:

>> "Timestamp" is the general term we use. We make it explicit in the
>> parent section that timestamps may or may not have time specification:
>>
>>     A timestamp is a specification of a date (possibly with a time) in a
>>     special format, either =<2003-09-16 Tue>= or
>>     =<2003-09-16 Tue 09:39>=
>
> Maybe I'm not explicit enough.  In section 8.1 of the Org 9.6 manual is
> a subsection "Time/Date Range" that *implies* times are supported in
> ranges by the use of words "time" and "timestamp" when, above, you're
> saying they are undefined (unsupported?) for now.  I'm merely saying
> adjust the manual to remove the implication.

Please check the manual from main branch of Org. It has more text:

- Time/Date range ::

  #+cindex: timerange
  #+cindex: date range
  Two timestamps connected by =--= denote a range.  In the agenda, the
  headline is shown on the first and last day of the range, and on any
  dates that are displayed and fall in the range.  Here is an example:

  #+begin_example
  ,** Meeting in Amsterdam
     <2004-08-23 Mon>--<2004-08-26 Thu>
  #+end_example

  Timerange is a timestamp consisting of two time units connected by =-=

  #+begin_example
  ,* Discussion on climate change
     <2006-11-02 Thu 10:00-12:00>
  #+end_example

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>