Re: [O] Occurance property, or some similar name?

[Christopher Allan Webber]

Michael Brand <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 16:43, Christopher Allan Webber
> Are your concerns concrete?
>
> I have thought about and tested this already before: The three example
> items above show up in the agenda, and are still correct even after
> changing with `S->'. So this "newer/future" Org file format works even
> with the "older/today" Org software. This is because the Org software
> of today flexibly binds the special property TIMESTAMP per item to the
> first active timestamp (i. e. "<>", not "[]") that is not prefixed
> with `SCHEDULED: ' or `DEADLINE: '. This binding is the reason why I
> would stick to the name TIMESTAMP when it comes to possibly new
> features that should write this special property keyword explicitly
> for this kind of timestamp. The sibling (not `C-c .') of `C-c
> C-s'/`C-c C-d' that you suggested originally would be such a feature.
>
> Michael

That's interesting, and no, my concerns weren't concrete.  I just tried
inserting the timestamp property via C-c C-x p and saw that it error'ed,
and wondered if there were further blocks around orgmode's system than
just the property insertion tools.

-- 
The bottom line.