Inactive and Active date stamp editing

Inactive and Active date stamp editing

[Chris Randle]

Hi Carsten

If I have an active date stamp and put my cursor in it and type `C-c . .
[RET]', this happens:

<2008-09-27 Sat> => <2008-09-30 Tue>

If I do a similar operation in an inactive stamp with either `C-c . .'
or `C-c ! . [RET]', I get

[2008-09-27 Sat] => [2008-09-27 Sa[2008-09-30 Tue]t]

A quick test shows a similar "corruption" behaviour doing `C-c ! .' on
an active date stamp, e.g.

<2008-09-27 Sat> => <2008-09-27 Sa[2008-09-30 Tue]t>

Could the Date+time editor be made to update inactive date stamps in the
same way as active? Also, I'd like it that `C-c .' on an inactive stamp
converts it to active after the edit and `C-c !' leaves it as inactive;
and similarly, that actives are converted to inactives using `C-c !'.

One could argue that a mismatched `C-c .' on an inactive date stamp or
`C-c !' on an active date stamp shouldn't edit them, but just insert
another date stamp of the different kind, but I cannot think of a
situation where one would insert a date stamp inside another.

Regardless of the above conversion behaviour, if `C-c .' edits an active
date stamp, I'd expect `C-c !' to edit an inactive date stamp.

One tiny cosmetic niggle on a similar vein: when invoking the Date+time
editor, it always shows its expected output as an active stamp, even if
invoked with `C-c !'.

Is there a reason for the existing behaviour? If not, please could you
consider implementing these two/three suggested changes: 1) editing
inactive date stamps, and 2) converting type during edit if invoked with
opposite keystrokes (if you see what I mean)? And perhaps if it's a
trivial tidy up, 3) the Date+time editor could show <> or [], as
appropriate, around its intended output.

Many thanks as always.

-- 
Chris Randle
Windows XP SP3 - GNU Emacs 22.1.1 - Org-mode 6.07b

Re: Inactive and Active date stamp editing

[Carsten Dominik]

Hi Chris,

I have fixed issue 1 and 2, but I think 3 I will leave alone.  It is  
purely cosmetic, and Org asks for a date/time in so many places that  
it would be a lot or work to always pass that information.  The only  
thing I might consider is to remove the brackets alltogether in the  
live display of the read-date interface.  But then< I do not think  
this is really relevant.

- Carsten

On Sep 30, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Chris Randle wrote:

> Hi Carsten
>
> If I have an active date stamp and put my cursor in it and type `C- 
> c . .
> [RET]', this happens:
>
> <2008-09-27 Sat> => <2008-09-30 Tue>
>
> If I do a similar operation in an inactive stamp with either `C-c . .'
> or `C-c ! . [RET]', I get
>
> [2008-09-27 Sat] => [2008-09-27 Sa[2008-09-30 Tue]t]
>
> A quick test shows a similar "corruption" behaviour doing `C-c ! .' on
> an active date stamp, e.g.
>
> <2008-09-27 Sat> => <2008-09-27 Sa[2008-09-30 Tue]t>
>
> Could the Date+time editor be made to update inactive date stamps in  
> the
> same way as active? Also, I'd like it that `C-c .' on an inactive  
> stamp
> converts it to active after the edit and `C-c !' leaves it as  
> inactive;
> and similarly, that actives are converted to inactives using `C-c !'.
>
> One could argue that a mismatched `C-c .' on an inactive date stamp or
> `C-c !' on an active date stamp shouldn't edit them, but just insert
> another date stamp of the different kind, but I cannot think of a
> situation where one would insert a date stamp inside another.
>
> Regardless of the above conversion behaviour, if `C-c .' edits an  
> active
> date stamp, I'd expect `C-c !' to edit an inactive date stamp.
>
> One tiny cosmetic niggle on a similar vein: when invoking the Date 
> +time
> editor, it always shows its expected output as an active stamp, even  
> if
> invoked with `C-c !'.
>
> Is there a reason for the existing behaviour? If not, please could you
> consider implementing these two/three suggested changes: 1) editing
> inactive date stamps, and 2) converting type during edit if invoked  
> with
> opposite keystrokes (if you see what I mean)? And perhaps if it's a
> trivial tidy up, 3) the Date+time editor could show <> or [], as
> appropriate, around its intended output.
>
> Many thanks as always.
>
> -- 
> Chris Randle
> Windows XP SP3 - GNU Emacs 22.1.1 - Org-mode 6.07b
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

RE: Inactive and Active date stamp editing

[Chris Randle]

Hi Carsten

You wrote:
> I have fixed issue 1 and 2, but I think 3 I will leave alone.  It is
> purely cosmetic, and Org asks for a date/time in so many places that
> it would be a lot or work to always pass that information.  The only
> thing I might consider is to remove the brackets alltogether in the
> live display of the read-date interface.  But then< I do not think
> this is really relevant.

Thank you for implementing those changes. I agree with you on point 3 -
it's cosmetic (although it does convey some information), so if it's not
trivial to implement, I'm glad you've passed on it to devote time to
more worthy items. And I'd vote for leaving the Date+time editor's <>
brackets alone in that case.

Thank you for Org-mode and the herculean effort you put in to
accommodating requests, yet somehow managing to avoid polluting the
clean design and orthogonal functionality.

-- 
Chris Randle