org-capture datetree below heading?

org-capture datetree below heading?

[Benedikt Steindorf]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 748 bytes --]

Hi,

i like to use a datetree under a headingis this somehow possible?

Example:

* Log
** 2017
*** 2017-05

My current config:

(setq org-capture-templates
        '(("t" "Tasks")
         ("tg" "Task (General)" entry (file+headline "~/org/work.org"
"Tasks")
           "* TODO %?\n  %i\n  %a")
         ("m" "Mehrarbeit")
         ("mn" "Nachtschicht" entry (file+datetree+prompt
"~/org/work.org" "Mehrarbeit")
           "** %^{Activity} :NIGHTSHIFT:")
         ("mr" "Rufbereitschaft" entry (file+datetree+prompt
"~/org/work.org" "Mehrarbeit")
           "** %^{Activity} :CALLOUT:")
         ("w" "Web-Site" entry (file "~/org/web.org")
           "* TODO Review %c\n%U\n%i\n" :immediate-finish))))


- Benedikt


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 858 bytes --]

Re: org-capture datetree below heading?

[Carsten Dominik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1184 bytes --]

Hi Benedict,

yes, get the latest master from the git repo and read the manual for that
version.

You can also look at a recent thread with the subject

"Use of date trees in Capture has been modified"

If you cannot upgrade, just put a

 :DATE_TREE: t

property to the heading under which you want the datetree to be built.

Carsten

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Benedikt Steindorf <bndkt@stndrf.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> i like to use a datetree under a headingis this somehow possible?
>
> Example:
>
> * Log
> ** 2017
> *** 2017-05
>
> My current config:
>
> (setq org-capture-templates
>         '(("t" "Tasks")
>          ("tg" "Task (General)" entry (file+headline "~/org/work.org"
> "Tasks")
>            "* TODO %?\n  %i\n  %a")
>          ("m" "Mehrarbeit")
>          ("mn" "Nachtschicht" entry (file+datetree+prompt
> "~/org/work.org" "Mehrarbeit")
>            "** %^{Activity} :NIGHTSHIFT:")
>          ("mr" "Rufbereitschaft" entry (file+datetree+prompt
> "~/org/work.org" "Mehrarbeit")
>            "** %^{Activity} :CALLOUT:")
>          ("w" "Web-Site" entry (file "~/org/web.org")
>            "* TODO Review %c\n%U\n%i\n" :immediate-finish))))
>
>
> - Benedikt
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2350 bytes --]

superflous blank line in capture

[Jay Dresser]

A little bug in capture I think.

I am using this template:

("a" "Add Nag" entry (file+headline "~/Org/jay.org" "Nags") "* %?\nSCHEDULED: %T\nDEADLINE: %T\n:PROPERTIES:\n:CATEGORY: Urgent\n:APPT_WARNTIME: 10m\n:END:" :prepend t)

This behaves correctly. If I am near the destination before I invoke, I
can see that it inserts as shown but with a blank line after the ":END:"
line. After I finish with C-c C-c, that blank line goes away.

However when I use this template:

("a" "Add Nag" entry (file+headline "~/Org/jay.org" "Nags") "* %?\nSCHEDULED: %T\nDEADLINE: %T\n:PROPERTIES:\n:CATEGORY: Urgent\n:APPT_WARNTIME: 10m\n:END:" :prepend t :unnarrowed t)

It also inserts the blank line, but when I finish with C-c C-c the blank
line remains. I assume that the behavior should not be different in this
way just because of the narrowing.

--
Jay Dresser

Re: superflous blank line in capture

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Jay Dresser <jay@jaydresser.us> writes:

> A little bug in capture I think.
>
> I am using this template:
>
> ("a" "Add Nag" entry (file+headline "~/Org/jay.org" "Nags") "* %?\nSCHEDULED: %T\nDEADLINE: %T\n:PROPERTIES:\n:CATEGORY: Urgent\n:APPT_WARNTIME: 10m\n:END:" :prepend t)
>
> This behaves correctly. If I am near the destination before I invoke, I
> can see that it inserts as shown but with a blank line after the ":END:"
> line. After I finish with C-c C-c, that blank line goes away.
>
> However when I use this template:
>
> ("a" "Add Nag" entry (file+headline "~/Org/jay.org" "Nags") "* %?\nSCHEDULED: %T\nDEADLINE: %T\n:PROPERTIES:\n:CATEGORY: Urgent\n:APPT_WARNTIME: 10m\n:END:" :prepend t :unnarrowed t)
>
> It also inserts the blank line, but when I finish with C-c C-c the blank
> line remains. I assume that the behavior should not be different in this
> way just because of the narrowing.

It should be fixed in maint branch. Could you confirm it?

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou