On Mon Sep 26 2011 Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
Why not have separate minibuffer prompts for surname and given name?
Many of my records are for Chinese people. Right now I can't be bothered
separating out the characters for surname and given name, and usually
they all get lumped into whatever
Direct editing maybe similar to wdired-mode could be, indeed, a
great thing. -- Yet as I said: I'll postpone such dreams till BBDB 3
has been released.
No! I want it now!
[...starts rolling on the floor screaming...]
Now! now! now! now! now!!
Stefan Damn adults!
On Mon Sep 26 2011 Stefan Monnier wrote:
Direct editing maybe similar to wdired-mode could be, indeed, a
great thing. -- Yet as I said: I'll postpone such dreams till BBDB 3
has been released.
No! I want it now!
[...starts rolling on the floor screaming...]
Now! now! now! now! now!!
Roland Winkler wink...@gnu.org writes:
PS: Wait! You say you have dreams that cannot be coded in elisp??
I hear some folks get divide-by-zero errors.
--
http://www.wistly.net
--
All the data continuously generated in
On 2011-09-24 03:27 +0800, Roland Winkler wrote:
When I looked at this once more I thought that this could be
something more people might like to use so that it could become part
of the BBDB trunk. Namely:
There could be an optional note field `name-face' similar to
`creation-date' and
On Sun Sep 25 2011 Leo wrote:
I am fine with anything that allows one to enter organisation-only
records nicely. For example, dividing Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant
into firstname and lastname is not nice. We should get rid of that.
Any suggestions what to do?
It seems that again this is a
On Mon, Sep 26 2011, Roland Winkler wrote:
On Sun Sep 25 2011 Roland Winkler wrote:
A much fancier solution would be to reimplement bbdb-create from
scratch by using something like a form to fill, similar to what
customize is using.
I should add: Such a rather substantial change would have
A much fancier solution would be to reimplement bbdb-create from
scratch by using something like a form to fill, similar to what
customize is using.
I should add: Such a rather substantial change would have rather low
priority on my current BBDB agenda. Currently, I consider a proper
BBDB
On Thu Sep 22 2011 Roland Winkler wrote:
It seems to me that something like a note field for the predicate
`person-p' with values natural, artifical, restaurant, bookstore etc
was more to the point here. Then the only thing you need to
customize is the function bbdb-display-name-organization.
On 2011-09-21 23:11 +0800, Roland Winkler wrote:
(bbdb-defstruct record
firstname lastname affix aka organization organization-p phone address mail
notes cache)
What do you think?
Maybe, I am just missing a typical application for myself. How could
such an extra predicate be used? Where
On Thu Sep 22 2011 Leo wrote:
It makes a different in displaying records. See:
http://i.imgur.com/0NJt1.png
Another example is one can list all organization-only records
easily.
It seems to me that something like a note field for the predicate
`person-p' with values natural, artifical,
On Wed Sep 21 2011 Leo wrote:
Maybe a cleaner way is to insert a new slot `organisation-p' in the
definition:
(bbdb-defstruct record
firstname lastname affix aka organization organization-p phone address mail
notes cache)
What do you think?
Maybe, I am just missing a typical
On Tue Sep 20 2011 Leo wrote:
Better support for organisation-only records. Also fix a bug when
firstname or lastname are nil. Comments welcome ;)
For those who did not browse Leo's code:
The current BBDB code assumes that a record should have a name so
that the record can be identified by
13 matches
Mail list logo
