You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thanks again for this great plugin, which I love. One issue I have is that I often would like to know which note a review item comes from without having to click through to open the link in preview mode. I use the review function to assign to do items from different projects (each which have their own note) to specific days but, at present, it is sometimes not possible to know which project an item relates to without clicking through to it. (I guess I could do a better job of making this clear in the wording of the to do item, but some of these notes have dozens of small to do items and that would be less than ideal).
To work around this, it would be great if the plugin would allow you to insert the name of the source note as part of the block review line prefix, so it could read something like:
- [ ] Assigned from [[name of source note]]: !
Is that possible?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks again for this great plugin, which I love. One issue I have is that I often would like to know which note a review item comes from without having to click through to open the link in preview mode. I use the review function to assign to do items from different projects (each which have their own note) to specific days but, at present, it is sometimes not possible to know which project an item relates to without clicking through to it. (I guess I could do a better job of making this clear in the wording of the to do item, but some of these notes have dozens of small to do items and that would be less than ideal).
To work around this, it would be great if the plugin would allow you to insert the name of the source note as part of the block review line prefix, so it could read something like:
- [ ] Assigned from [[name of source note]]: !
Is that possible?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: