From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dboyd2@mmm.com (J. David Boyd) Subject: Re: "constellations" Re: relative deadlines Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:50:26 -0500 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53797) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XzXF1-0006fa-Pe for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:55:17 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XzXEw-0006CY-Sf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:55:11 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:35032) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XzXEw-0006BO-Lp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:55:06 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XzXEu-00016Q-LA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 21:55:04 +0100 Received: from 169.15.136.127 ([169.15.136.127]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 21:55:04 +0100 Received: from dboyd2 by 169.15.136.127 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 21:55:04 +0100 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Tom Baker writes: > Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 12:05:39 -0500 > From: dboyd2@mmm.com (J. David Boyd) > To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > Subject: Re: [O] relative deadlines > > J. David Boyd < dboyd2@mmm.com > wrote on Dec 9: >> Jeffrey Brent McBeth writes: >> > From time to time (each time I delve into using org-mode for > deadlines >> > before my habits fall apart), I find the desire to have some form > of >> > relative deadlines. By this I mean, that there are often sequences > of >> > tasks that I know the time required to complete and when things > are >> > due. These tasks may repeat (usually do). >> > >> > It would be awful helpful to me, but I would guess few others, as > a >> > search didn't find much, for there to be some annotation like this >> > (example is farcical, notation is notional) >> > >> > * Go on date >> > DEADLINE: <2014-12-25> >> > ** Ask Girl #<-3w># >> > ** Wash Hair #<-2w># >> > ** Make Money #<-1w2d># >> > ** Get in Car #<-0d># >> > ** Call her back #<+1w># >> > >> > that in the agenda view would show as a sequence of tasks with the > following dates >> > Go on date <2014-12-25> >> > Ask Girl <2014-12-04> >> > Wash Hair <2014-12-11> >> > Make Money <2014-12-16> >> > Get in Car <2014-12-25> >> > Call her back <2015-01-01> >> > >> > I have a python function that can take a stripped down org file > and >> > places an active date after each ## (or inactive after >> > #[block]#), that I hacked up today to see if it would really be as >> > useful as I thought, but I keep thinking that someone somewhere > must >> > have scratched this itch elsewhere, and having to partially parse > org >> > in python and modify the text rather than having my agenda smart >> > enough to figure it out gives me pause... >> > >> > If nobody have better ideas, are the block delimiters I'm using > going >> > to conflict with some other feature in org that I'm just not using >> > yet? >> > >> > The main functuionality I'm stumbling toward is having an easily >> > moveable end date (so replacing the block with absolute dates is a >> > nono). >> > >> > Thanks for your attention, >> > Jeffrey McBeth >> >> I think like that as well. I know when some _thing_ has to be done. > Then I >> start thinking of all the support items in relative terms to the > main one. >> >> You should add this to org mode, if able. It would be a nice > addition... >> >> Dave > > The relative deadline part should be implemented, I agree. > > I also like the collection of intermediate tasks. Does Emacs have a > name for that? Because I used to call that a "constellation" of > deadlines, and if we have the relative timestamps, the constellation > would be easy to implement on the fly. > > This addresses Jeffrey's original intention, you see, if I explain. If > I have an appointment at 4pm and I know it is a 40m drive AND I may > need to get dressed formally (that takes 30m), then I really can't > tell the Org system "Notify me at 4pm". Instead, I *need* to have it > say, "Get me driving by 320pm, and if I need to dress up, then get > that started by 250pm". Really, for me, the "appointment at 4" starts > much earlier. Also, keep track of the fact that I will probably come > right back, so if the appointment ends at 530, then I won't get back > until 610pm. > > Now if Jeffrey wants to schedule something like this BUT needs to take > into account that he already has a 6pm appointment, then his request > for an "easily movable" end is reasonable. When he is setting up the > appointment, Org needs to tell him, as soon as possible, that there is > a conflict, and so when they suggest "330pm instead of 4pm?" he can > try that. > > Tom Yup, exactly what I would like. I hate modern appointment calendars, as they have no means of accomplishing this... Dave