From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Daniel J. Sinder" <djsinder@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Midnight and noon in agendas
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:45:50 -0700
Message-ID: <4480956E.3020900@gmail.com>
References: <447F79F8.2060708@gmail.com>
	<8f7cc6986079c0cfee6c91b925f0a175@science.uva.nl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FmFaj-000430-Ip
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 15:45:53 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FmFai-00042n-0I
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 15:45:53 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FmFah-00042k-TT
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 15:45:51 -0400
Received: from [208.97.132.5] (helo=randymail-a5.dreamhost.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FmFhE-0001wT-VR
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 15:52:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8f7cc6986079c0cfee6c91b925f0a175@science.uva.nl>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org


Carsten Dominik wrote:
> Well, if this is the way things are normally interpreted,
> then this is clearly a bug.  Thanks for explaining this to me.
> Strange system.  Switching am to pm always makes the event happen later, 
> except when the hour is 12.

If 12am/00:00 is considered the start of the day, then the rule
holds -- switching 12am to 12pm makes the event later that same day,
at noon.

> Should 12am be listed as 0:00 or as 24:00?
> Should 12:21am be listed as 0:21 or as 24:21?
> 
> It seems to me that the logic would be a bit better to schedule these 
> show uo as 0:00 and 0:21.  If you wanted to put something at midnight at 
> the end of the day you would then have to use 24:00 and 24:21.

I like this idea (allowing times at 24:00 and beyond).  The user can
place things where they want: at the start or end of the day.  As a
bonus, if you work the night shift, you'll be able to see your daily
agenda all under one date at the start of your shift.