On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:

Hello,

Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:

> Another way to implement this would be to use different VALUES for the
> DATE_TREE/WEEK_TREE property - maybe that would actually be a somewhat
> cleaner implementation.

I think ":DATE_TREE: week" ":DATE_TREE: t" is cleaner, indeed.

This is not quite what I meant.

I meant

:DATE_TREE: my_diary

:DATE_TREE: food_and_health

:DATE_TREE: movies watched

> I'll rethink that and I will also define a test.

I also agree there's an opportunity to refactor this and come out with
a more generic interface.

Yet another option is to define new capture targets, e.g.

- file+datetree+olp
- file+datetree+olp+date
- file+datetree+regexp
- file+datetree+regexp+date
- ...
- file+weektree+olp
- ...

Those would ignore WEEK_TREE and DATE_TREE properties altogether.

Yes, one could have additional ways - but I am not going to take out the existing ones, which would needlessly break things with various users.

Another thing I was thinking is a way to force prompting for a date, for example through a prefix argument, so that a single capture template could be used for using the current date and optionally a set one.

Carsten

Regards,

--
Nicolas Goaziou