Eric Abrahamsen <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
> Ken Mankoff <mank...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> No, scheduled + deadline is a different use case. The syntax I use,
>> =SCHEDULED: <2020-01-01>--<2020-01-07>=, is valid,
I wouldn't bet on it. I'm sure this can lead to subtle problems. For
example,
* Test
SCHEDULED: <2020-01-01>--<2020-01-07>
(org-entry-get (point-min) "SCHEDULED") => <2020-01-01>, i.e, range end
information is lost.
>>. One (of many) use cases: a week long vacation.
>> This use case is supported by Org since the Agenda helpfully shows
>> "(1/7)", and "(2/7)", etc. before each entry. Everything else is so
>> efficient and has shortcuts, including time ranges, I just hoped I was
>> missing something here. Perhaps it hasn't been implemented yet.
>
> I think what Nicolas means is that, in the sort of use case you're
> outlining above, you should probably be using a plain timestamp.
> SCHEDULED means "I'm going to work on this TODO now", in which case
> a time span doesn't quite make sense -- you start working at the start
> of the span, and you finish when you toggle the keyword to DONE. For
> a vacation, a plain timestamp is more appropriate.
Exactly.
If you know the exact range, use a plain timestamp. SCHEDULED is for
when you know when to start, but not when to end. With
SCHEDULED + DEADLINE, you know when to start, you're not sure when to
end, but it must be done before deadline.
Regards,
