Journal publishing timetables
In most fields and for most journals, there is no time-table because it takes as long as it takes.

This means that after they receive your paper, they will send it out to a few referees, which have to be found first. How long finding referees takes is not under the control of the journal editors - they have to ask people until three of them said "yes".

Then, the referees have to write the review. Typically, they have about 3 months of time for that, and a request for extension is almost always granted. So think of it more like 6 months. Exceptions apply here (e.g., for the journal "Science", who manage to enforce shorter reviewing times).

Then your paper maybe accepted only conditional to changes. You do the changes within a month or so, and then reviewing starts again. So there goes another 3-6  months in addition to the time that the editor needs for organizing the process.

This means that for most reputable journals, there is a long pipeline of papers in-progress and whenever they make a new issue that is not a special issue, they take some papers that already went through the process and publish them. There can be a substatial "out-queue" of these papers, which is why some publishers came up with the concept of already publishing "done" papers before the paper has a journal issue assigned (e.g., for Springer, this is called "Online First").

As an example, in computer science, an overall time span of 1-3 years is common.

As a bottom line, the time to publish can only be influenced by the journal editors up to a certain, small, degree, e.g., how swiftly the editor performs actions whenever there is something that she can do at the respective point in time. So publishing a time line would make little sense.