* Active timestamp with notification in advance @ 2008-02-26 22:01 Wanrong Lin 2008-02-27 14:46 ` Carsten Dominik 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-26 22:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Hi, Currently we can set the number of days a deadline should be notified in advance with something like this: * TODO Do this DEADLINE: <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> But it does not work on a plain active time stamp like this: * TODO See Doctor <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> Can we consider adding this feature to plain active time stamp? It would be great for appointment notification. Thanks for giving that a thought. Wanrong ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-26 22:01 Active timestamp with notification in advance Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-27 14:46 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-27 15:33 ` Wanrong Lin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Carsten Dominik @ 2008-02-27 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wanrong Lin; +Cc: emacs-orgmode In Org-mode, by definition, Deadlines are the ones with ahead warnings. Why don't you just turn the appointments where you need early reminders into deadlines? - Carsten On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:01 PM, Wanrong Lin wrote: > Hi, > > Currently we can set the number of days a deadline should be > notified in advance with something like this: > > * TODO Do this > DEADLINE: <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> > > But it does not work on a plain active time stamp like this: > > * TODO See Doctor > <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> > > Can we consider adding this feature to plain active time stamp? It > would be great for appointment notification. > > Thanks for giving that a thought. > > Wanrong > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-27 14:46 ` Carsten Dominik @ 2008-02-27 15:33 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-27 16:03 ` Bernt Hansen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-27 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Changing appointment time stamp into deadline will work, but I just think conceptually it is kind of twisted, because "deadline" means you have to do it BEFORE the specified time, while "appointment" means you have to do it at the specified time. Many calendar systems (like Google) support ahead notifications for appointments, so maybe we can consider extending the definition of ahead warnings in org-mode to scheduled items and active time stamps. Just my 2 cents. (Or, maybe I should make a better habit of looking ahead a few days in my agenda buffer. :-)) Wanrong Carsten Dominik wrote: > In Org-mode, by definition, Deadlines are the ones with ahead warnings. > Why don't you just turn the appointments where you need early > reminders into deadlines? > > - Carsten > > On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:01 PM, Wanrong Lin wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Currently we can set the number of days a deadline should be notified >> in advance with something like this: >> >> * TODO Do this >> DEADLINE: <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> >> >> But it does not work on a plain active time stamp like this: >> >> * TODO See Doctor >> <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> >> >> Can we consider adding this feature to plain active time stamp? It >> would be great for appointment notification. >> >> Thanks for giving that a thought. >> >> Wanrong >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-27 15:33 ` Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-27 16:03 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 1:29 ` Bastien 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Bernt Hansen @ 2008-02-27 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wanrong Lin; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Maybe use SCHEDULED: instead of DEADLINE: ? Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> writes: > Changing appointment time stamp into deadline will work, but I just > think conceptually it is kind of twisted, because "deadline" means you > have to do it BEFORE the specified time, while "appointment" means you > have to do it at the specified time. Many calendar systems (like > Google) support ahead notifications for appointments, so maybe we can > consider extending the definition of ahead warnings in org-mode to > scheduled items and active time stamps. Just my 2 cents. (Or, maybe I > should make a better habit of looking ahead a few days in my agenda > buffer. :-)) > > Wanrong > > Carsten Dominik wrote: >> In Org-mode, by definition, Deadlines are the ones with ahead warnings. >> Why don't you just turn the appointments where you need early >> reminders into deadlines? >> >> - Carsten >> >> On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:01 PM, Wanrong Lin wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Currently we can set the number of days a deadline should be >>> notified in advance with something like this: >>> >>> * TODO Do this >>> DEADLINE: <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> >>> >>> But it does not work on a plain active time stamp like this: >>> >>> * TODO See Doctor >>> <2008-03-24 Mon -30d> >>> >>> Can we consider adding this feature to plain active time stamp? It >>> would be great for appointment notification. >>> >>> Thanks for giving that a thought. >>> >>> Wanrong >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >>> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-27 16:03 ` Bernt Hansen @ 2008-02-28 1:29 ` Bastien 2008-02-28 1:41 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 2:05 ` Wanrong Lin 0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Bastien @ 2008-02-28 1:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bernt Hansen; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes: > Maybe use SCHEDULED: instead of DEADLINE: ? I'm afraid this won't solve Wanrong's problem: you don't get warned about scheduled items. Wanrong: maybe you can turn your items into scheduled items and then use `org-check-before-date' in the relevant file to get the list of upcoming scheduled items. But that's still a manual workaround... -- Bastien ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 1:29 ` Bastien @ 2008-02-28 1:41 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 2:05 ` Wanrong Lin 1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Bernt Hansen @ 2008-02-28 1:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bastien; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Bastien <bzg@altern.org> writes: > Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes: > >> Maybe use SCHEDULED: instead of DEADLINE: ? > > I'm afraid this won't solve Wanrong's problem: you don't get warned > about scheduled items. Oops. You're right - I should have tested that first. Thanks for the clarification. -Bernt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 1:29 ` Bastien 2008-02-28 1:41 ` Bernt Hansen @ 2008-02-28 2:05 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 2:20 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 7:09 ` Carsten Dominik 1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 2:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Bastien wrote: > Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes: > > >> Maybe use SCHEDULED: instead of DEADLINE: ? >> > > I'm afraid this won't solve Wanrong's problem: you don't get warned > about scheduled items. > > Wanrong: maybe you can turn your items into scheduled items and then use > `org-check-before-date' in the relevant file to get the list of upcoming > scheduled items. > > But that's still a manual workaround... > Thanks a lot for the suggestions, but manual workaround does not work for me, as I want org to take care of giving me a notification in advance in the agenda buffer. For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates a strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack of real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit puzzling to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly scheduled, while plain time stamp item may or may not be something that needs to take actions on (as it could be just an event). Wanrong ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 2:05 ` Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 2:20 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 7:09 ` Carsten Dominik 1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 2:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Wanrong Lin wrote: > >> > Thanks a lot for the suggestions, but manual workaround does not work > for me, as I want org to take care of giving me a notification in > advance in the agenda buffer. > > For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to > have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it > would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be > even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates a > strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and > hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack of > real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit puzzling > to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly scheduled, > while plain time stamp item may or may not be something that needs to > take actions on (as it could be just an event). > > Wanrong > > Actually, I was wrong on the "lack of real appointment" support claim above. We can define a TODO heading with a *plain* active time stamp as an appointment, and hence maybe a default ahead notification can be applied to those items. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 2:05 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 2:20 ` Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 7:09 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-28 10:19 ` Bastien 2008-02-28 15:55 ` Wanrong Lin 1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Carsten Dominik @ 2008-02-28 7:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wanrong Lin; +Cc: emacs-orgmode On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:05 AM, Wanrong Lin wrote: > Bastien wrote: >> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes: >> >> >>> Maybe use SCHEDULED: instead of DEADLINE: ? >>> >> >> I'm afraid this won't solve Wanrong's problem: you don't get warned >> about scheduled items. >> >> Wanrong: maybe you can turn your items into scheduled items and >> then use >> `org-check-before-date' in the relevant file to get the list of >> upcoming >> scheduled items. >> >> But that's still a manual workaround... >> > Thanks a lot for the suggestions, but manual workaround does not > work for me, as I want org to take care of giving me a notification > in advance in the agenda buffer. > > For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to > have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it > would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be > even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates > a strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and > hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack > of real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit > puzzling to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly > scheduled, while plain time stamp item may or may not be something > that needs to take actions on (as it could be just an event). Hmmm, lets discuss this for a while. One thing is that I have been thinking for a while already if we should have an APPOINTMENT keyword to mark plain time stamps that actually are appointments, and in this way to differentiate them from events that you'd like to have in your agenda. However, about ahead warnings of appointments. The way I see it is this: One important goal (at least for me) is to keep my agenda as empty as possible, listing only the things I really need to do. If I have a meeting in a few days and I get an ahead warning, this only distracts me. Because each time I see that reminder, I need to think *again* why I did put that reminder and what I am supposed to be doing to prepare it. Isn't is much better to just put the meeting on the agenda with a timestamp and then immediately think about *tasks* that I need to do before the meeting. List those tasks under the meetig headline, and assign deadlines to them - you will get the ahead warning. This seems to me is a much saner way of working. But I am interested to hear your use case - why do you want to be reminded of future appointments *each* time you look at your list for today? For meetings where I do not have anything to prepare, I do take a look every morning on an extended agenda of 10 days, to see what is coming. Once a day, and that is it. - Carsten > > > Wanrong > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 7:09 ` Carsten Dominik @ 2008-02-28 10:19 ` Bastien 2008-02-28 15:29 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-28 15:55 ` Wanrong Lin 1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Bastien @ 2008-02-28 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes: > On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:05 AM, Wanrong Lin wrote: >> >> For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to >> have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it >> would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be >> even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates >> a strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and >> hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack >> of real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit >> puzzling to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly >> scheduled, while plain time stamp item may or may not be something >> that needs to take actions on (as it could be just an event). > > Hmmm, lets discuss this for a while. It looks like there are two questions here: whether we should have a dedicated syntax for appointments, distinct from active timestamps, and whether we should allow warnings on other timestamps than deadline ones. (Maybe a good thing to keep these issue separate as long as possible.) I don't feel the need of a new APPOINTMENT keyword, or a SCHEDULED@ one, because I'm using timestamps like this: - active timestamps for appointments; - SCHEDULED timestamps for items that (1) need to remain in the agenda when they are not DONE, and (2) I don't need to be warned about; - DEADLINE for everything else that I need to attach a date with. I guess this setup is somewhat counter-intuitive for newcomers, since the semantic of SCHEDULED makes you believe this is what you need for most tasks. But I think this semantic is somewhat misleading. With the setup above, I tend to use more and more active timestamps and deadlines. The need for a scheduled item is very rare, since the two specific features of SCHEDULED is that I won't be warned about such tasks and I will be able to find them with `org-check-before-date'... So, rather than introducing a new keyword, I'd better get rid of them and redefine timestamps like this: [2008-02-28 jeu] Inactive timestamp <2008-02-28 jeu> Active timestamp {2008-02-28 jeu} Interactive timestamp By "interactive", I mean that those timestamps would be aware of `org-deadline-warning-days' and other variables like this one, or be able to stay in the agenda if the associated task is not DONE, etc. For exemple: {2008-02-28 jeu -10d} => Warn 10 days before {2008-02-28 jeu -10d--+2d} => Warn 10 days before and 2 days after, if not DONE Active timestamp would also use this syntax, but for the purpose of defining *time spans*, not pre- and post-reminders. For example: <2008-02-18 jeu +3d> => Define an appointment for a meeting between 2008-02-28 and 2008-02-21. I'm aware that this change would require a careful redefinition of the use of "scheduled" and "deadline" in variable names and in the manual, but I think that it would finally help simplifying things a bit. In a sense, relying spontaneous understanding that people have of the words "SCHEDULED" and "DEADLINE" can be a bit dangerous -- or simply assumes too much about the normal use of those kinds of timestamps. -- Bastien ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 10:19 ` Bastien @ 2008-02-28 15:29 ` Carsten Dominik 0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Carsten Dominik @ 2008-02-28 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bastien; +Cc: emacs-orgmode On Feb 28, 2008, at 11:19 AM, Bastien wrote: > Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes: > >> On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:05 AM, Wanrong Lin wrote: >>> >>> For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to >>> have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it >>> would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be >>> even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates >>> a strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and >>> hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack >>> of real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit >>> puzzling to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly >>> scheduled, while plain time stamp item may or may not be something >>> that needs to take actions on (as it could be just an event). >> >> Hmmm, lets discuss this for a while. > > It looks like there are two questions here: whether we should have a > dedicated syntax for appointments, distinct from active timestamps, > and > whether we should allow warnings on other timestamps than deadline > ones. > (Maybe a good thing to keep these issue separate as long as possible.) > > I don't feel the need of a new APPOINTMENT keyword, or a SCHEDULED@ > one, > because I'm using timestamps like this: > > - active timestamps for appointments; > > - SCHEDULED timestamps for items that (1) need to remain in the agenda > when they are not DONE, and (2) I don't need to be warned about; > > - DEADLINE for everything else that I need to attach a date with. > > I guess this setup is somewhat counter-intuitive for newcomers, since > the semantic of SCHEDULED makes you believe this is what you need for > most tasks. But I think this semantic is somewhat misleading. Yes, time has shown tat it is misleading. This is unfortunate, but I don't think we can move always from this. Too many people are using this already, and we need to stay compatible and if possible we should not add complexity. - Carsten > > > With the setup above, I tend to use more and more active timestamps > and > deadlines. The need for a scheduled item is very rare, since the two > specific features of SCHEDULED is that I won't be warned about such > tasks and I will be able to find them with `org-check-before-date'... > > So, rather than introducing a new keyword, I'd better get rid of them > and redefine timestamps like this: > > > [2008-02-28 jeu] Inactive timestamp > <2008-02-28 jeu> Active timestamp > {2008-02-28 jeu} Interactive timestamp > > > By "interactive", I mean that those timestamps would be aware of > `org-deadline-warning-days' and other variables like this one, or be > able to stay in the agenda if the associated task is not DONE, etc. > > For exemple: > > {2008-02-28 jeu -10d} > => Warn 10 days before > > {2008-02-28 jeu -10d--+2d} > => Warn 10 days before and 2 days after, if not DONE > > Active timestamp would also use this syntax, but for the purpose of > defining *time spans*, not pre- and post-reminders. > > For example: > > <2008-02-18 jeu +3d> > => Define an appointment for a meeting between > 2008-02-28 and 2008-02-21. > > > I'm aware that this change would require a careful redefinition of the > use of "scheduled" and "deadline" in variable names and in the manual, > but I think that it would finally help simplifying things a bit. > > In a sense, relying spontaneous understanding that people have of the > words "SCHEDULED" and "DEADLINE" can be a bit dangerous -- or simply > assumes too much about the normal use of those kinds of timestamps. > > -- > Bastien ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 7:09 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-28 10:19 ` Bastien @ 2008-02-28 15:55 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 16:34 ` Egli Christian (KIRO 433) 1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-orgmode Carsten Dominik wrote: >>> >> Thanks a lot for the suggestions, but manual workaround does not work >> for me, as I want org to take care of giving me a notification in >> advance in the agenda buffer. >> >> For SCHEDULED and plain active time stamp, I don't think we need to >> have a default ahead notification setting as with deadlines, but it >> would really be nice to support the <..... -3d> format. It would be >> even nicer to have a new keyword (like "SCHEDULED@") that indicates a >> strictly scheduled item (just a fancy term for "appointment") and >> hence a default ahead notification setting can be applied. The lack >> of real appointment support in org-mode in fact is a little bit >> puzzling to me, since SCHEDULED item may or may not be strictly >> scheduled, while plain time stamp item may or may not be something >> that needs to take actions on (as it could be just an event). > > Hmmm, lets discuss this for a while. > > One thing is that I have been thinking for a while already if we > should have an APPOINTMENT keyword > to mark plain time stamps that actually are appointments, and in this > way to differentiate them > from events that you'd like to have in your agenda. > > However, about ahead warnings of appointments. The way I see it is this: > One important goal (at least for me) is to keep my agenda as empty as > possible, > listing only the things I really need to do. If I have a meeting in a > few days > and I get an ahead warning, this only distracts me. Because each time > I see > that reminder, I need to think *again* why I did put that reminder and > what I > am supposed to be doing to prepare it. > > Isn't is much better to just put the meeting on the agenda with a > timestamp and then > immediately think about *tasks* that I need to do before the meeting. > List those > tasks under the meetig headline, and assign deadlines to them - you > will get > the ahead warning. This seems to me is a much saner way of working. > But I > am interested to hear your use case - why do you want to be reminded of > future appointments *each* time you look at your list for today? > > For meetings where I do not have anything to prepare, I do take a look > every > morning on an extended agenda of 10 days, to see what is coming. > Once a day, and that is it. > > - Carsten > > A simple example is: sometimes I have very early dental appointment, like 8:00AM. But usually I don't get up that early. So if I open my computer at 9:00AM and find out I have missed an appointment, then the agenda is useless. And I will get haunted by the feeling that "I might still have missed something even if I checked my agenda". I do agree that too many ahead notifications is distracting. But on the other hand, my imagination of the ideal org usage is: I look at today's agenda, and things are planned well for me, I just need to follow the agenda blindly (well, ideally). This is the reward for my upfront planning, meaning if I take my diligence in planning tasks when the issues just come up, I don't have to hassle around in the last minute. I want to have that security feeling of "I won't miss anything if I checked my agenda". To achieve that goal, sometimes I need some sense of what is going to happen or what I am supposed to do tomorrow, or next a few days, depending on the task and context. To check agendas ahead every day is a good habit, but is not reliable, and I want to eliminate dependency on those habits as much as possible. I want to rely on only one habit: check today's agenda. To reduce the distractions from those ahead notifications, we can do the following: 1. Don't give too early notifications. In my above example, probably one day ahead is good enough 2. Group those ahead notifications at the end of today's agenda, maybe with a divider to separate them out. Another perspective to my above argument is: many of us use org (and emacs) because of its flexibility. It is not the easiest to learn to use, but once you master it, you can configure it to suit your own style. And hence I don't expect everyone will agree with my planning strategy, but if let's say 1/3 of the users think the feature has its value, I think it is well worth consideration, given it is an option that does no harm to people who choose not to use it. Thanks for reading this. Wanrong ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* RE: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 15:55 ` Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 16:34 ` Egli Christian (KIRO 433) 2008-02-28 16:49 ` Wanrong Lin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Egli Christian (KIRO 433) @ 2008-02-28 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Hi Wanrong > To achieve that goal, sometimes I need some sense of what is going to > happen or what I am supposed to do tomorrow, or next a few days, > depending on the task and context. To check agendas ahead every day is a > good habit, but is not reliable, and I want to eliminate dependency on > those habits as much as possible. I simply enter my appointments in my diary, integrate my diary in my agenda and use the week view in the agenda. That way I always see what I'm supposed to do tomorrow. HTH Christian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 16:34 ` Egli Christian (KIRO 433) @ 2008-02-28 16:49 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 18:14 ` Bernt Hansen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode If you can stick to the habit of looking into the next day (especially on the last day in you weekly agenda), that will work. But I am not reliable on that. And sometimes you may need to look ahead more than one day. I want to be lazy and dumb with the help of org. :-) Wanrong > I simply enter my appointments in my diary, integrate my diary in my > agenda and use the week view in the agenda. That way I always see what > I'm supposed to do tomorrow. > > HTH > Christian > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 16:49 ` Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 18:14 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 18:29 ` Wanrong Lin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread From: Bernt Hansen @ 2008-02-28 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wanrong Lin; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Set up your agenda to display today forward. My weekly view always shows today and the next 6 days. (setq org-agenda-start-on-weekday nil) -Bernt Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> writes: > If you can stick to the habit of looking into the next day (especially > on the last day in you weekly agenda), that will work. But I am not > reliable on that. And sometimes you may need to look ahead more than > one day. I want to be lazy and dumb with the help of org. :-) > > Wanrong > >> I simply enter my appointments in my diary, integrate my diary in my >> agenda and use the week view in the agenda. That way I always see what >> I'm supposed to do tomorrow. >> >> HTH >> Christian >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Active timestamp with notification in advance 2008-02-28 18:14 ` Bernt Hansen @ 2008-02-28 18:29 ` Wanrong Lin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread From: Wanrong Lin @ 2008-02-28 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode This is good! I did not know such a setting exists. I will use this while Carsten and others think about whether it is worth to have appointment notifications. Thanks a lot! Wanrong Bernt Hansen wrote: > Set up your agenda to display today forward. My weekly view always > shows today and the next 6 days. > > (setq org-agenda-start-on-weekday nil) > > -Bernt > > > Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> writes: > > >> If you can stick to the habit of looking into the next day (especially >> on the last day in you weekly agenda), that will work. But I am not >> reliable on that. And sometimes you may need to look ahead more than >> one day. I want to be lazy and dumb with the help of org. :-) >> >> Wanrong >> >> >>> I simply enter my appointments in my diary, integrate my diary in my >>> agenda and use the week view in the agenda. That way I always see what >>> I'm supposed to do tomorrow. >>> >>> HTH >>> Christian >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >>> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode >> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-02-28 18:29 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2008-02-26 22:01 Active timestamp with notification in advance Wanrong Lin 2008-02-27 14:46 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-27 15:33 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-27 16:03 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 1:29 ` Bastien 2008-02-28 1:41 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 2:05 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 2:20 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 7:09 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-28 10:19 ` Bastien 2008-02-28 15:29 ` Carsten Dominik 2008-02-28 15:55 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 16:34 ` Egli Christian (KIRO 433) 2008-02-28 16:49 ` Wanrong Lin 2008-02-28 18:14 ` Bernt Hansen 2008-02-28 18:29 ` Wanrong Lin
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).