Re: [O] org-review-schedule

[Bastien]

Alan Schmitt <address@hidden> writes:

>> - maybe you can use "naked" timestamps like 2014-04-19 sam.
>>   instead of inactive ones, this way using "[" in the agenda
>>   will not create false positives by inserting entries with
>>   a REVIEW property.
>
> OK. I'm not sure what "[" is supposed to do in the agenda, and I don't
> see how it could interfere.

It includes headlines with an inactive timestamp in the agenda.
So if you have a property :REVIEW_DELAY: [Inactive timestamp] this
headline will be show in the agenda if the timestamp matches.

> (I like inactive time stamps because I can
> easily adjust their dates with C-left and C-right, is it possible to do
> so with naked timestamps?)

Well... no.  Of course you can simply use inactive timestamps and
advice users not to include them in the agenda.

> Yes. But I should think about it more to see where I could take
> this.

Thanks in advance!

-- 
 Bastien