Re: Org mode timestamps on the Moon ;] (was: [FEATURE REQUEST] Timezone support in org-mode datestamps and org-agenda)

2023-01-30 Thread Ihor Radchenko
Tom Gillespie writes: > Oh boy. In short, I think we can only hope they come up with > LTC and we already have a syntactic space to say whether > our reference seconds are TAI/UTC/LTC/MTC/JTC etc. And > being the privileged squats that we are if the time system is > left out then it means UTC. Th

Re: Org mode timestamps on the Moon ; ] (was: [FEATURE REQUEST] Timezone support in org-mode datestamps and org-agenda)

2023-01-30 Thread Greg Minshall
Tom, > The only generalized solution is to record the full location (see > intro to http://naggum.no/lugm-time.html which I'm surprised hasn't > been linked in this thread yet, ... very nice -- thanks for the pointer! cheers, Greg

Re: Org mode timestamps on the Moon ;] (was: [FEATURE REQUEST] Timezone support in org-mode datestamps and org-agenda)

2023-01-26 Thread Tom Gillespie
Oh boy. In short, I think we can only hope they come up with LTC and we already have a syntactic space to say whether our reference seconds are TAI/UTC/LTC/MTC/JTC etc. And being the privileged squats that we are if the time system is left out then it means UTC. The friendly thing to do would be to

Org mode timestamps on the Moon ;] (was: [FEATURE REQUEST] Timezone support in org-mode datestamps and org-agenda)

2023-01-26 Thread Ihor Radchenko
Tom Gillespie writes: > ; given my objective to ensure that org documents can be interpreted > ; without having to stick stupid things like #+planet: mars in the > ; header or risk your earthling readers getting incorrect dates --- I > ; suggest that org switch to storing all dates and times in e