Matt Lundin <m...@imapmail.org> writes: > There is a special property name for active timestamps: TIMESTAMP. You > can access the first active timestamp in an entry (either with column > view or org-entry-get) via the special property TIMESTAMP. Inactive > timestamps = TIMESTAMP_IA. >
Hm, that's interesting. But I'm not talking about a way to access it via elisp, I'm talking about a place to actually put it in say, the property drawer. Say: ** Pick up bike from the shop :PROPERTIES: :OCCURANCE: <2011-04-12 Tue 19:00> :END: etc. It's nice to know there's a meta-property for TIMESTAMP, but I'm specifically looking for a nice place to put that timestamp away. This is for cleanliness / easy get-set purposes. >> - Maybe if we formalize this property, we should make a command for it? >> Maybe C-c C-S-o? > > There is currently a command to change plain active timestamps from the > agenda. (In fact, this will also change SCHEDULED and DEADLINE > timestamps when on a SCHEDULED or DEADLINE line.) > > org-agenda-date-prompt (>) > > AFAIK, there is no similar built-in function to call on headlines in org > files. One can, however, navigate to the timestamp and use the > Shift-arrow keys or C-c . to change the appointment. > That's useful, and would change this property even if I put it in such a drawer... provided that property already existed. But what if I want to insert something on a currently un-OCCURANCE'd (or whatever) thing? I don't want it to go on the headline, that looks gross. >> - It would be nice to formalize this so we could actually steer people >> in the right direction in the docs. > > What would you suggest adding to the following pages? > > (info "(org) Creating timestamps") > (info "(org) Special properties") That's entirely dependent on if we can suggest a property for this behavior. It doesn't have to be mandatory. I'm partly trying to see if other people want this as much as I do. Surely I'm not the only one who finds putting active timestamps on the headline or scattered just anywhere in the entry kind of gross? I do appreciate your useful reply, though! - Chris -- 𝓒𝓱𝓻𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓹𝓱𝓮𝓻 𝓐𝓵𝓵𝓪𝓷 𝓦𝓮𝓫𝓫𝓮𝓻
