On Jul 6, 2007, at 11:56, Rick Moynihan wrote:
Eddward DeVilla wrote:
...
Now first off, I know I could get most of what I want if I were to
switch to use outline entries instead of a plain list. Heading don't
wrap. That just seems wrong though. It's a list. I'd have to
replace the simple
On Jul 6, 2007, at 12:45, Rick Moynihan wrote:
Carsten Dominik wrote:
Well, a two-state todo setup really *is* a checkbox, even if it does
not look like one. About the only difference is the command you
use to toggle the state.
I agree that they have the same number of states, but I think
On 7/6/07, Carsten Dominik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Todo keywords need to be words currently, so you could do
something like
(setq org-todo-keywords
'((sequence TODO | DONE)
(type I_I | IXI)
))
Cool. I'll have to remember that. I can get back my old states _, v
X.
On 7/6/07, Carsten Dominik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It it is only the wrapping, you could simply hack org-fill-paragraph,
for
example like this:
Thanks. I'll have to play with it.
But I guess you are really after definition lists.
I actually like definition lists, but sadly the real nit
On 7/6/07, Rick Moynihan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After thinking about it; I have on occasion wanted to schedule a
checkboxed item into the agenda. This said I'm not convinced supporting
this is a good idea. Does anyone else have any views?
I'm usually for collapsing similar things in to one
Eddward DeVilla wrote:
On 7/6/07, Rick Moynihan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After thinking about it; I have on occasion wanted to schedule a
checkboxed item into the agenda. This said I'm not convinced supporting
this is a good idea. Does anyone else have any views?
I'm usually for collapsing
