Hi, Celia, Thanks for the report! But this is not a bug, more likely a misunderstanding of what the manual says to expect.
Celia Evans <[email protected]> writes: > An inactive timestamp [YYYY-MM-DD] with zero-padded (two-digit) month > and day is fontified and behaves as though it were an active timestamp > (clicking it opens the day agenda), while the same date written with > unpadded (single-digit) month/day, [YYYY-M-D], is correctly treated as > inactive (no agenda link). > Per the manual (Timestamps, Creating Timestamps), square-bracket > timestamps should never trigger agenda inclusion regardless of the > digit width of the month/day fields. This currently only holds for the > unpadded form. The reason the unpadded [YYYY-M-D] form behaves as you expect is because it is not recognized as a timestamp at all: double-digit (zero-padded) days and months are required (unlike in diary-style expressions). The correctly formatted (zero-padded) inactive timestamp actually behaves as intended. These timestamps are inactive in the sense that they do not trigger *an entry* to *show up* in the agenda, not in the sense that they are not fontified or that clicking them does not trigger an *agenda display* for that date. Try adding an entry, e.g. * Timestamp test entry [2026-09-12] to one of your agenda files and clicking it to see what the agenda shows for that date: it will not include this entry. Closed (for the bug tracker). Regards, Christian
