Hello, , Joel J. Adamson! Jose Robins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joel J. Adamson wrote: >> Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >>> Hi Jose, Manish >>> >>> I don't really think that it would be reasonable to make any entry >>> that contains a string that looks like a time show up in the agenda. >>> >> >> I think I missed part of this conversation. If I put >> >> ** Wash the dog <2008-04-10 09:56 > >> >> in one of my org-agenda-files, it shows up at 9:56 in the agenda >> time-grid. Is this not the intended behavior? >> >> Joel >> >> > Yes, that is intended behavior and it works fine. The question was > whether a time range without a time-stamp would work as > well. something like... > > ** 9:55 am - 10:15 am wash the dog > - would put this task in "today's" agenda view. > > I see Carsten's point about not wanting to recognize any arbitrary > text string which looks like a time to be considered a > "time-of-specification". A possible compromise is to have a string > which looks like "<10:15-10:30> " to be considered as a task for today > which appears @ the appropriate time in the agenda view. The beauty is > that (a) you avoid having to type in extra keystrokes to schedule it, > (b) no need to clutter with an additional date and (c) if it doesn't > get done or something, when I do the agenda view tomorrow, it shows up > there as well and it doesn't get lost. Better would be a duration rather than an end date/time. _______________________________________________ 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
