Rainer Stengele <rainer.steng...@online.de> writes: > Am 05.03.2015 um 09:02 schrieb Loris Bennett: >> Rainer Stengele <rainer.steng...@online.de> writes: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>> I have lots of weekly reoccuring meetings and do collect the clocked >>> time for each meeting. After a while I have lots of CLOCK >>> lines. Opening the TODO shows all the CLOCK lines shown, but my focus >>> is on text below the CLOCK lines. I started to use multiple LOGBOOK >>> blocks in order to hide older CLOCK lines. Seems to work fine with >>> clocking etc. My requirement would be to only open the first LOGBOOK >>> block when opening the headline (TODO). That way I could hide older >>> entries from using screen space and instead see the text below >>> immediately. >>> >>> Anybody else uses multiple LOGBOOK blocks that way? Other ideas how to >>> work? Any chance to get this regarded as an enhancement idea? >>> >>> Thank you. >>> Regards, Rainer >>> >>> >>> * TODO [#A] Weekly Services - Action Items >>> :LOGBOOK: >>> CLOCK: [2015-03-04 Mi 10:15]--[2015-03-04 Mi 11:30] => 1:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-03-02 Mo 11:00]--[2015-03-02 Mo 12:15] => 1:15 >>> :END: >>> :LOGBOOK: >>> CLOCK: [2015-02-25 Mi 10:00]--[2015-02-25 Mi 11:00] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2015-02-16 Mo 10:00]--[2015-02-16 Mo 11:15] => 1:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-02-06 Fr 09:30]--[2015-02-06 Fr 09:45] => 0:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-02-06 Fr 10:00]--[2015-02-06 Fr 11:00] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-23 Fr 13:45]--[2015-01-23 Fr 14:00] => 0:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-22 Do 14:30]--[2015-01-22 Do 14:45] => 0:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-22 Do 13:45]--[2015-01-22 Do 14:00] => 0:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-21 Mi 09:45]--[2015-01-21 Mi 10:45] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-20 Di 09:45]--[2015-01-20 Di 10:00] => 0:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-19 Mo 16:30]--[2015-01-19 Mo 16:45] => 0:15 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-19 Mo 13:15]--[2015-01-19 Mo 15:00] => 1:45 >>> CLOCK: [2015-01-19 Mo 10:00]--[2015-01-19 Mo 11:15] => 1:15 >>> CLOCK: [2014-12-15 Mo 10:00]--[2014-12-15 Mo 10:30] => 0:30 >>> CLOCK: [2014-12-03 Mi 10:30]--[2014-12-03 Mi 11:15] => 0:45 >>> CLOCK: [2014-12-01 Mo 09:45]--[2014-12-01 Mo 10:45] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2014-11-03 Mo 10:00]--[2014-11-03 Mo 11:00] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2014-11-10 Mo 09:45]--[2014-11-10 Mo 10:45] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2014-11-19 Mi 10:30]--[2014-11-19 Mi 11:15] => 0:45 >>> CLOCK: [2014-11-24 Mo 10:00]--[2014-11-24 Mo 11:00] => 1:00 >>> CLOCK: [2014-11-25 Di 08:00]--[2014-11-25 Di 10:45] => 2:45 >>> :END: >>> >>> - text I would like to see without having to scroll over all the CLOCK lines >> >> I use two drawers: >> >> #+DRAWERS: LOGBOOK OLDLOGS >> >> When the LOGBOOK get a bit long I manually move some the lines to >> OLDLOGS. Both draws only open when I TAB on them. >> >> I don't actually use the data in the logs directly, just as a backup for >> my other time-keeping. This is mainly because the one-minute resolution >> of the clocking is to fine for my needs. >> >> Have you changed the clocking resolution? If so, how? Or are you just >> an amazingly accurate clocker? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Loris >> > Hi Loris, > > please check variable org-time-stamp-rounding-minutes in order to round time > stamps.
OK, thanks. I'll have a look at that. > You are right, when I am in an org file the logbook drawers do not > open by default when cycling. My use case: I am jumping to a headline > directly from an agenda item. "Tabbing" on that item jumps to the > headline and shows the complete contents, including drawers. Not sure > why this is the case. I would like to have the same behavior as when > tabbing in the Org file directly. Can you confirm this is the same in > your setting? If I jump from the agenda entry 'Fun', I get something like the following: * Stuff ** Fun... ** Boring... If I press 'tab', I get * Stuff ** Fun :LOGBOOK:... :OLDLOGS:... ** Boring If I press 'tab' again, nothing happens. If I press 'tab' a third time, the heading fold back and I get * Stuff ** Fun... ** Boring... again. I'm not sure why the second press performs no action. In any case, I only see the contents of the LOGBOOK draw if I move onto it and then press 'tab' again. So quite different from the behaviour you get. Regards Loris > Regards, > Rainer Stengele > > -- This signature is currently under construction.
