[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp
From: |
Matt Lundin |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp |
Date: |
Thu, 31 May 2012 07:43:50 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
Nick Dokos <address@hidden> writes:
> Nick Dokos <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Nick Dokos <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> > ...
>> >
>> > I haven't gone to gmane looking for the discussion, but if one of the
>> > principals involved remembers the reason, maybe they can enlighten us.
>> >
>>
>> I found the discussion on gmane - check the thread starting at
>>
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/45243
>>
>
> Having read the discussion, I agree with Nicolas and disagree with Matt
> and Bastien :-)
Let me chime in here: I agree that the new behavior (i.e., following a
link with return) is unworkable with the current definition of
org-at-timestamp-p.
My concern in the previous thread was to preserved what I viewed as a
convenience that dated back to the earliest days of org: i.e., being
able to change timestamps quickly with the S-arrow keys. I would still
prefer to retain a "wide" definition of timestamps for the S-arrow keys.
But if a little traditional usability is lost for the sake of
consistency, then we should change org-at-timestamp-p. (And Nicolas has
done heroic work in bringing consistency to the definition of various
org elements!)
Best,
Matt
- [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Nick Dokos, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Nick Dokos, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Samuel Wales, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Nick Dokos, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Samuel Wales, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, suvayu ali, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Nick Dokos, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Nick Dokos, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Nick Dokos, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp, Samuel Wales, 2012/05/29
- Re: [O] Annoying behavior of RET after a timestamp,
Matt Lundin <=