From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Allan Webber Subject: Re: Occurance property, or some similar name? Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:57:31 -0500 Message-ID: <87hba2kutw.fsf@dustycloud.org> References: <87d3ksqujv.fsf@dustycloud.org> <87oc4bxoew.fsf@fastmail.fm> <8739lnnqfb.fsf@dustycloud.org> <87wriyl2o6.fsf@dustycloud.org> <87oc4aky8m.fsf@dustycloud.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47352) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QA2RZ-0002YC-Pl for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:57:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QA2RU-0007oz-19 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:57:25 -0400 Received: from li28-75.members.linode.com ([75.127.72.75]:38265) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QA2RT-0007oY-V9 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:57:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Michael Brand's message of "Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:42:19 +0200") 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: Michael Brand Cc: Matt Lundin , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Michael Brand writes: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 16:43, Christopher Allan Webber > Are your concerns concrete? > > I have thought about and tested this already before: The three example > items above show up in the agenda, and are still correct even after > changing with `S->'. So this "newer/future" Org file format works even > with the "older/today" Org software. This is because the Org software > of today flexibly binds the special property TIMESTAMP per item to the > first active timestamp (i. e. "<>", not "[]") that is not prefixed > with `SCHEDULED: ' or `DEADLINE: '. This binding is the reason why I > would stick to the name TIMESTAMP when it comes to possibly new > features that should write this special property keyword explicitly > for this kind of timestamp. The sibling (not `C-c .') of `C-c > C-s'/`C-c C-d' that you suggested originally would be such a feature. > > Michael That's interesting, and no, my concerns weren't concrete. I just tried inserting the timestamp property via C-c C-x p and saw that it error'ed, and wondered if there were further blocks around orgmode's system than just the property insertion tools. -- The bottom line.