Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support for timestamps with internal time ranges (events) #371

Open
hpfr opened this issue Sep 17, 2023 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #237
Open

Support for timestamps with internal time ranges (events) #371

hpfr opened this issue Sep 17, 2023 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #237
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@hpfr
Copy link

hpfr commented Sep 17, 2023

Org QL does not currently match timestamps with internal time ranges, commonly used for events. These are different from time/date ranges where two timestamps are connected by --.

The example from the manual:

* Discussion on climate change
  <2006-11-02 Thu 20:00-22:00>

Interestingly, the latest Org Syntax document just defines times as:

TIME (optional)
An instance of the pattern H:MMREST where H represents a one to two digit number (and can start with 0), and M represents a single digit. REST can contain anything but \n or closing bracket.

I was wondering if the Org QL behavior was by design or simply because you don’t personally use these. I think this could be fixed by changing the timestamp regexp, but the predicate code is pretty complex, so I don’t know the full implications of that.

Somewhat related to #159


Matching these timestamps would be another step towards fully replacing the Org agenda with Org QL (and its caching!). There is currently no mechanism for generating an Org agenda-like time grid, but I think it makes sense for Org QL to limit its scope to simply returning (and in the case of org-ql-view, displaying) lists of headings. Matching timestamps with internal time ranges would mean a package like calfw could leverage a calfw-org-ql backend rather than the org-agenda-based calfw-org.

@alphapapa
Copy link
Owner

This is a nicely written bug report, but please see #237, which it duplicates.

@hpfr
Copy link
Author

hpfr commented Sep 17, 2023

I must have only searched issues. Well, now there is an issue that PR can close 😅

@alphapapa
Copy link
Owner

Yeah, probably good to have this as an issue, and since you wrote it up so well, might as well use this one. :)

@alphapapa alphapapa self-assigned this Sep 17, 2023
@alphapapa alphapapa added this to the 0.8 milestone Sep 17, 2023
@alphapapa alphapapa modified the milestones: 0.8, 0.9 Dec 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants