Re: Point jumps when changing timestamps

[Matt Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org>]

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> Matt Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> writes:
>>
>> If I am on the headline, the easiest way (for me) to navigate to the
>> headline is C-n C-e. Then I can type S-left or S-right and quickly move
>> through the dates; the cursor, moreover, will be in a convenient
>> position for typing RET and adding a line of notes. This, for me, is a
>> bit more convenient than typing C-n C-3 C-f or C-s <, etc.
>
> Ok, it may be convenient in that specific case, but it still looks like
> a hack to me. Another solution would be to implement a function to
> navigate between time-stamps, similar to `org-next-link'. One can even
> generalize this function to move to the next non-structural element
> (time-stamp, link, footnote, latex snippet, emphasized text)[1].

That sounds like a good idea.

>> From a UI perspective, however, I would suggest that a bit looser
>> behavior adds some convenience to org-mode. For instance C-c C-o will
>> currently open a link if the cursor is at the point before or after
>> it.
>>
>>   [[http://www.google.com]]
>>  ^ here                    ^ here
>
> This is different. `org-open-at-point' is an end-user function, whereas
> `org-at-timestamp-p' isn't. I don't think predicates should be sloppy:
> I don't want to implement `org-really-at-timestamp-p'.
>
> Furthermore, being loose isn't always convenient. In the following
> example, where will I go if I use C-c C-o on the space between the two
> links?
>
>     [[http://www.google.com][Google]] [[http://www.bing.com][Bing]]

It seems that google wins in this instance. :)

> I'd suggest to fix `org-at-timestamp-p', and allow, if it must be,
> sloppiness in `org-shiftleft' and friends.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. That sounds fine.

My concern here is not with the cleanness of the code but with
usability. For years, org users have been able to use S-left and S-right
when the cursor immediately follows the timestamp. This has felt, to me,
both deliberate and natural -- it has become a fundamental part of the
way I use org-mode. If the underlying code can be made cleaner, that's
fine, so long as the usability remains.

But it is also very likely that I am the only person who changes
timestamps in this way. Are there any others?

Best,
Matt