Karl Voit devn...@karl-voit.at writes:
It's set: my first properties will be:
:ITOLDTHEM_EMAIL:
:ITOLDTHEM_ADDRESS:
:ITOLDTHEM_PHONE:
We can't use a hierarchy?
* Hukarz
:PROPERTIES:
:TRANSFER:
:[LINKTOKARLJUNIOR]:
:EMAIL: bar
:ADDRESS:
:PHONE:
:[LINKTOYOURSELF]:
Esben Stien b...@esben-stien.name writes:
We can't use a hierarchy?
Well, no, sorry!
--
Bastien
Esben Stien b...@esben-stien.name writes:
* Hukarz
:PROPERTIES:
:TRANSFER:
:[LINKTOKARLJUNIOR]:
:EMAIL: bar
:ADDRESS:
:PHONE:
:[LINKTOYOURSELF]:
:EMAIL: baz
:END:
Or how about just make the heading a type contact? That would be
infinitely more useful.
* Hukarz
Esben Stien b...@esben-stien.name writes:
Then you could do:
* Hukarz
:PROPERTIES:
:ORGTYPE: contact
:END
** EMAIL
*** f...@bar.bz
:PROPERTIES:
:EMAILTYPE: business0
:ID: 000
:END:
This dude uses this for business, but actually send him mail via
private email, cause he sees that after
Hi Esben,
The way that org-contacts currently works is that contact details are
grouped together in the same PROPERTIES drawer, e.g.
* Alexis
:PROPERTIES:
:EMAIL: ale...@example.com
:PHONE: -
:END:
and that's what i've assumed in my MobileOrg code for parsing
org-contacts data. i
* David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that this kind of simple thing looks like a better
idea. However, it would also be nice to be able to call it some name
where a person who encounters the software capability but doesn't yet
know what it's for will understand what it's
Karl Voit writes:
* David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that this kind of simple thing looks like a better
idea. However, it would also be nice to be able to call it some name
where a person who encounters the software capability but doesn't yet
know what it's for will
Karl Voit devn...@karl-voit.at writes:
* David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that this kind of simple thing looks like a better
idea. However, it would also be nice to be able to call it some name
where a person who encounters the software capability but doesn't yet
know
* Eric Abrahamsen e...@ericabrahamsen.net wrote:
Is this a prefix for multiple values? Ie, it will be XXX_email,
XXX_cell, XXX_phone and so on?
Yes.
I think the word context is pretty
relevant here; you might consider something like CONTEXT_EMAIL or
CONTEXT_MY_EMAIL.
Just a thought.
I
* Robert Horn rjh...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
My first reaction was to use a short sentence like itoldthem. I can't
think of any single english word that doesn't also need a subject to
describe which direction the transfer went.
I love it :-)
It's set: my first properties will be:
Hi!
I want to extend my (IMHO already advanced) org-contacts setup with
information I gave *to* companies about myself: what email address I
gave them (I own a catch-all email domain)[1], what address they
stored about me (in case I am moving and want to update), what phone
number they got of me
Provided? Given?
--
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
The disease DOES progress. MANY people have died from it. ANYBODY can get it.
Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.
Samuel Wales samolog...@gmail.com writes:
Provided? Given?
I agree that this kind of simple thing looks like a better
idea. However, it would also be nice to be able to call it some name
where a person who encounters the software capability but doesn't yet
know what it's for will understand
Perhaps relaxing the understandability requirement in favor of
searchability would work.
14 matches
Mail list logo
