Schedule event

Schedule event

[Jason Dunsmore]

In the Org manual, a distinction is made between items that have a
timestamp with the "SCHEDULED" keyword and items that have a plain
timestamp:

  "Scheduling an item in Org-mode should not be understood in the same way
  that we understand scheduling a meeting. Setting a date for a meeting is
  just a simple appointment, you should mark this entry with a simple
  plain timestamp, to get this item shown on the date where it
  applies. This is a frequent misunderstanding by Org users. In Org-mode,
  scheduling means setting a date when you want to start working on an
  action item."

http://orgmode.org/org.html#Deadlines-and-scheduling

I call these items with plain timestamps "events".  These are items that
come and go on the agenda whether or not I do anything.  I add "events"
to my agenda pretty often, so I'd like to schedule them using the same
interface I use to schedule SCHEDULED items.

Someone on IRC suggested that I use the following function:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(defun org-schedule-event ()
  (interactive)
  (let ((org-scheduled-string ""))
    (org-schedule)))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

However, it inserts an extra space.  Example:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
* Test
   <2011-08-05 Fri>
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

instead of:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
* Test
  <2011-08-05 Fri>
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I could hack together a fix for this, but I was thinking that perhaps
the org-schedule function should be made more general so that it can be
combined with the org-deadline function, which has much of the same
code, and used to insert plain timestamps as well.  Thoughts?

Re: Schedule event

[Carsten Dominik]

On 5.8.2011, at 19:05, Jason Dunsmore wrote:

> In the Org manual, a distinction is made between items that have a
> timestamp with the "SCHEDULED" keyword and items that have a plain
> timestamp:
> 
>  "Scheduling an item in Org-mode should not be understood in the same way
>  that we understand scheduling a meeting. Setting a date for a meeting is
>  just a simple appointment, you should mark this entry with a simple
>  plain timestamp, to get this item shown on the date where it
>  applies. This is a frequent misunderstanding by Org users. In Org-mode,
>  scheduling means setting a date when you want to start working on an
>  action item."
> 
> http://orgmode.org/org.html#Deadlines-and-scheduling
> 
> I call these items with plain timestamps "events".  These are items that
> come and go on the agenda whether or not I do anything.  I add "events"
> to my agenda pretty often, so I'd like to schedule them using the same
> interface I use to schedule SCHEDULED items.
> 
> Someone on IRC suggested that I use the following function:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (defun org-schedule-event ()
>  (interactive)
>  (let ((org-scheduled-string ""))
>    (org-schedule)))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> However, it inserts an extra space.  Example:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> * Test
>   <2011-08-05 Fri>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> instead of:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> * Test
>  <2011-08-05 Fri>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> I could hack together a fix for this, but I was thinking that perhaps
> the org-schedule function should be made more general so that it can be
> combined with the org-deadline function, which has much of the same
> code, and used to insert plain timestamps as well.  Thoughts?

One could certainly combine the code for schedule and deadline
into a single function and also allow for this function to insert
a time stamp without a keyword.  However, this might lead to
confusion.  Org internally uses the second line
in an entry in a special way, for time stamps with keywords like
DEADLINE, SCHEDULED, CLOSED.  It will become confused with
time stamps that have no keywords.

Why do you want this special interface for setting an event date.
How is that better than `C-c .'?  Is it that you don't need to
position the cursor?

Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT
an place these time stamps also into the second line.  That might be
more easy to implement.



> 

Re: Schedule event

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Carsten,

Carsten Dominik wrote:
> On 5.8.2011, at 19:05, Jason Dunsmore wrote:
>> In the Org manual, a distinction is made between items that have a
>> timestamp with the "SCHEDULED" keyword and items that have a plain
>> timestamp:
>> 
>>  "Scheduling an item in Org-mode should not be understood in the same way
>>  that we understand scheduling a meeting. Setting a date for a meeting is
>>  just a simple appointment, you should mark this entry with a simple plain
>>  timestamp, to get this item shown on the date where it applies. This is a
>>  frequent misunderstanding by Org users. In Org-mode, scheduling means
>>  setting a date when you want to start working on an action item."
>> 
>> http://orgmode.org/org.html#Deadlines-and-scheduling
>> 
>> I call these items with plain timestamps "events".

You should add the fact that they're active timestamps in your wording to be
fully accurate -- but I know you do talk about these.

>> These are items that come and go on the agenda whether or not I do
>> anything. I add "events" to my agenda pretty often, so I'd like to schedule
>> them using the same interface I use to schedule SCHEDULED items.
>
> One could certainly combine the code for schedule and deadline into a single
> function and also allow for this function to insert a time stamp without a
> keyword. However, this might lead to confusion. Org internally uses the
> second line in an entry in a special way, for time stamps with keywords like
> DEADLINE, SCHEDULED, CLOSED. It will become confused with time stamps that
> have no keywords.
>
> Why do you want this special interface for setting an event date. How is
> that better than `C-c .'? Is it that you don't need to position the cursor?

I guess so. Even if I'm not really asking for it, I'm sure I'd use such a
function, would it exist.

> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place these
> time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to implement.

FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies the
bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones are
without any keyword.

In that case, I'd opt for EVENT or some such in favor of APPT. Just think at
birthdays, or a TV show: qualifying them as APPT is a bit limitative, IMHO.
EVENT seems a more general term.

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: Schedule event

[suvayu ali]

On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sebastien Vauban
<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> wrote:
>> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place these
>> time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to implement.
>
> FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies the
> bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones are
> without any keyword.
>

Yes, this would be a nice addition. I always find it difficult to
decide how to put regular timestamps too.

-- 
Suvayu

Open source is the future. It sets us free.

Re: Schedule event

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Suvayu,

suvayu ali wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sebastien Vauban
> <wxhgmqzgwmuf-geNee64TY+gS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place
>>> these time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to
>>> implement.
>>
>> FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies
>> the bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones
>> are without any keyword.
>
> Yes, this would be a nice addition. I always find it difficult to decide how
> to put regular timestamps too.

By regular timestamps, you mean: inactive timestamps? Can you, maybe, comment
on what makes the decision difficult?

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: Schedule event

[Jason Dunsmore]

"Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:

>> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place these
>> time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to implement.
>
> FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies the
> bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones are
> without any keyword.

I agree, a special keyword for events would clarify the issue.  It would
also make this part of the manual easier to understand:
http://orgmode.org/org.html#Deadlines-and-scheduling

> In that case, I'd opt for EVENT or some such in favor of APPT. Just think at
> birthdays, or a TV show: qualifying them as APPT is a bit limitative, IMHO.
> EVENT seems a more general term.

I also like the EVENT keyword.

Regards,
Jason

Re: Schedule event

[suvayu ali]

Hi Seb,

On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Sebastien Vauban
<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> wrote:
> Hi Suvayu,
>
> suvayu ali wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sebastien Vauban
>> <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> wrote:
>>>> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place
>>>> these time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to
>>>> implement.
>>>
>>> FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies
>>> the bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones
>>> are without any keyword.
>>
>> Yes, this would be a nice addition. I always find it difficult to decide how
>> to put regular timestamps too.
>
> By regular timestamps, you mean: inactive timestamps? Can you, maybe, comment
> on what makes the decision difficult?
>

I meant active timestamps. I'll give you an example of a dilemma.


* Timestamp in headline <2011-08-06 Sat>
  For long headlines, this becomes really ugly.

* Timestamp below headline
  <2011-08-06 Sat>

  Problem with this is, I can't use fill paragraph otherwise it gets
  wrapped with the timestamp. The solution is to have a blank line in
  between.


As you see, my reasons are mostly about personal preference and
aesthetics.

> Sebastien Vauban
>

Cheers,

-- 
Suvayu

Open source is the future. It sets us free.

Re: Schedule event

[Jason Dunsmore]

"Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:

> Hi Suvayu,
>
> suvayu ali wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sebastien Vauban
>> <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> wrote:
>>>> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place
>>>> these time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to
>>>> implement.
>>>
>>> FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies
>>> the bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones
>>> are without any keyword.
>>
>> Yes, this would be a nice addition. I always find it difficult to decide how
>> to put regular timestamps too.
>
> By regular timestamps, you mean: inactive timestamps?

I think he means active timestamps with no keyword.  The Org FAQ and
manual refer to active timestamps with no keyword as "plain timestamps".

> Can you, maybe, comment on what makes the decision difficult?

At least for me, in my early Org days, I wasn't sure of the best
formatting convention for "plain timestamps".  I settled on putting them
on the line directly after the header with the proper indentation, since
this is how SCHEDULED items were inserted.

Regards,
Jason

Re: Schedule event

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Suvayu,

suvayu ali wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Sebastien Vauban wrote:
>> suvayu ali wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sebastien Vauban wrote:
>>>>> Another idea would be to introduce another keyword like APPT an place
>>>>> these time stamps also into the second line. That might be more easy to
>>>>> implement.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, my instinctive reaction would be: yes, great!  Maybe that clarifies
>>>> the bits around dates: all active dates get keywords, only inactive ones
>>>> are without any keyword.
>>>
>>> Yes, this would be a nice addition. I always find it difficult to decide
>>> how to put regular timestamps too.
>>
>> By regular timestamps, you mean: inactive timestamps? Can you, maybe,
>> comment on what makes the decision difficult?
>
> I meant active timestamps. I'll give you an example of a dilemma.
>
> * Timestamp in headline <2011-08-06 Sat>
>   For long headlines, this becomes really ugly.

I never used that form, in fact, because I don't like information to be placed
at different columns over the different headlines.

> * Timestamp below headline
>   <2011-08-06 Sat>
>
>   Problem with this is, I can't use fill paragraph otherwise it gets
>   wrapped with the timestamp. The solution is to have a blank line in
>   between.

Nor can't you do it with the first version, right?

And the problem will stay, even if we have events keyword'ed with APPT or
EVENT, do you agree?

I never use `M-q' on headlines, as I know they have to stay on one line,
whichever their length... A solution to this could be to make an Org-aware
version of `M-q' that would not try to refill Org headlines.

> As you see, my reasons are mostly about personal preference and
> aesthetics.

OK.

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: Schedule event

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Jason,

Jason Dunsmore wrote:
> "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf-geNee64TY+gS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> writes:
>> suvayu ali wrote:
>>> Yes, this would be a nice addition. I always find it difficult to decide
>>> how to put regular timestamps too.
>>
>> By regular timestamps, you mean: inactive timestamps?
>
> I think he means active timestamps with no keyword. The Org FAQ and manual
> refer to active timestamps with no keyword as "plain timestamps".
>
>> Can you, maybe, comment on what makes the decision difficult?
>
> At least for me, in my early Org days, I wasn't sure of the best formatting
> convention for "plain timestamps". I settled on putting them on the line
> directly after the header with the proper indentation, since this is how
> SCHEDULED items were inserted.

OK. I thought the difficult decision was about the type of timestamps:
SCHEDULED, not SCHEDULED but active, or inactive.

Now, I understand he meant about the positioning of the timestamp itself.
Thanks for clarifying this.

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: Schedule event

[Jason Dunsmore]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:

> Why do you want this special interface for setting an event date.
> How is that better than `C-c .'?  Is it that you don't need to
> position the cursor?

Yes, that was my original reason.  But your suggestion of adding a
special keyword for events is another good reason.  Also, as recently
discussed, consistent formatting conventions and clarifying the
frequently-misunderstood issue of SCHEDULED vs. no-keyword active
timestamps are good reasons.

Regards,
Jason

Re: Schedule event

[Bastien]

Hi Jason,

Jason Dunsmore <emacs-orgmode@dunsmor.com> writes:

> Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:
>
>> Why do you want this special interface for setting an event date.
>> How is that better than `C-c .'?  Is it that you don't need to
>> position the cursor?
>
> Yes, that was my original reason.  But your suggestion of adding a
> special keyword for events is another good reason.  Also, as recently
> discussed, consistent formatting conventions and clarifying the
> frequently-misunderstood issue of SCHEDULED vs. no-keyword active
> timestamps are good reasons.

I agree adding an EVENT: (or "APPT:") would be nice.

What I suggest is this:

1. merge org-schedule and org-deadline into a new org-plan function.

2. allow org-plan to set a new org-schedule-special keyword (this
   keyword would be "EVENT" by default, but customizable.)

Now I'm unclear yet whether the set of features that is available 
for scheduled entries should also return special-keyword entries
(e.g. org-agenda-get-scheduled) or if this should be a completely 
separate set of features -- in which case I have the feeling we 
are really emulating the use of an :EVENT: property.

What is your take on this?

Thanks for bringing this up anyway!

PS: it took me long to reply because I'm also considering using 
the property drawer to store timestamps like SCHEDULED, DEADLINE
and so on.   But it is a big move and we can't delay your request 
by relying on such a change.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Schedule event

[Greg Troxel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2115 bytes --]


Bastien <bzg@altern.org> writes:

> Jason Dunsmore <emacs-orgmode@dunsmor.com> writes:
>
>> Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:
>>
>> Yes, that was my original reason.  But your suggestion of adding a
>> special keyword for events is another good reason.  Also, as recently
>> discussed, consistent formatting conventions and clarifying the
>> frequently-misunderstood issue of SCHEDULED vs. no-keyword active
>> timestamps are good reasons.
>
> I agree adding an EVENT: (or "APPT:") would be nice.

I just started struggling with this when trying to make ical exports.
(In my not-really-defined planning system :-) I have multiple kinds of
events:

  events that I wish to be aware of, and perhaps choose to go to, but I
  don't consider myself to have a plan to attend.   For this I use bare
  active timestamps.

  events that I am planning to attend, but which I feel reasonably free
  not to.  For this I'm using TODO and SCHEDULED: (which I am thinking
  is wrong).

  events/meetings that I am committed to attending.  For these I use
  APPT (a custom TODO sequence keyword) and SCHEDULED:


After writing the above, I think my use of SCHEDULED: for events is just
wrong, and I should use it only to label days (and perhaps times) that I
plan to complete TODO items, and then use APPT/active and TODO/active
for meetings and maybe-meetings.

> PS: it took me long to reply because I'm also considering using 
> the property drawer to store timestamps like SCHEDULED, DEADLINE
> and so on.   But it is a big move and we can't delay your request 
> by relying on such a change.

I almost always leave the property drawer collapsed, and it seems like
it hides things I don't want to see.  But I do want SCHEDULED, DEADLINE,
etc. to be very visible.    On the other hand, I would like the location
property to be hoisted to the first/second line, so perhaps putting them
all in the property drawer and having a customizable view where everyone
can see their preferred subset, formatted nicely, would be best.  Is
that more or less what you are suggesting?


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]