* Eric S Fraga <e.fr...@ucl.ac.uk> wrote: > Karl Voit <devn...@karl-voit.at> writes: > >> IMHO: Org-mode does *not* seem to be made for managing calendar >> events that go beyond simple one-time-occurrence events. > > I would argue that this is not at all the case, especially if you > consider that org uses a tree hierarchy and tags so that one can group > separate entries in a variety of ways,
This is fore sure a big advantage of Org-mode! > you can clone with time shift whole trees, etc. Oh, I have to look up that clone thing. This is new to me. Do you happen to have an URL for this feature by instance? > Most calendar tools require you to specify all the > conditions for a particular "event" in one go whereas with org you can > have a number of different entries for the same "event"... etc. Full ack. > Also, with sexp, you can manage practically anything you might like > although, of course, it does require learning a certain amount of > elisp. Recurring events with exceptions are not a problem, for > instance. I'd consider myself tech-savvy. But without having learned (E)LISP (yet), I can not use sexp-entries without reading a manual each time I want to use it. This is nothing I'd consider for normal users or daily use. It's not that end-user friendly (when you consider end-users as users without ELISP knowledge). For ELISP hackers this might work! But I am not sure how much percentage of Emacs/Org-mode users actually learned ELISP. And learning ELISP just to be able to write down a recurring event seems «strange» to me. > In any case, as always with computer tools, what works for you is what > matters! Full Ack. > For me, org is just plainly much more suitable for my mode of > working; every other calendar system I have tried has constrained me > much more. But that's *me*. This holds for most of the calendar systems out there, I totally agree. (This is why I still carry around my old PalmOS-PDA together with my highly sophisticated Android smartphone...) >> but you *have* to support at least the same featureset of Outlook >> Calendar in order to think of a (two-way-) sync mechanism to >> Org-mode. > > I guess this depends on what types of events you are likely to > have in the outlook calendar. In my case, only a small feature > set is likely necessary (mostly repeating lectures and one off > meetings) so a sync should be possible. I don't think anybody is > proposing a full-blown totally automatic sync mechanism between > org and Outlook (or whatever) that covers the union of the two > products' feature sets... insanity lies in that direction ;-) Sorry, I might have exaggerated a bit. But since I was implementing a one-way-sync mechanism between two different calendar systems I got a pretty good feeling of how different you can define the very same thing. Recurring events with exceptions is quite common but very hard to sync between different systems! And I am sure that this is not the only example of «being common and hard to do». > But I'll worry about this later this year when forced to use MS... Oh, sorry to hear about that :-( For ELISP-hackers out there: is this hard to do? A method which can be called «generate a series of Org-mode time stamps starting with $THIS_TIMESTAMP_CONTAINING_REPEATS up to $THIS date». I could think of generating such a series of <2011-06-22 Wed> <2011-06-29 Wed> ... just to be able to see all occurrences of an event and delete one specific event in between if necessary. This would ease exceptions for «ordinary» users like me. -- Karl Voit