Waiting Tasks
 

Moin!

What is the preferred way with OmniFocus to handle actions that I am waiting for someone else to act? E.g if I delegate a responsibility to someone else by sending an email. I have completed my action, but for the project to continue I have to wait for the reply. How do I model that in OmniFocus.

TIA and so long
-Ralf

I just add a new action "from [person], [what I'm waiting for]" and put it into a "waitingfor" context. Sometimes I'll add a due date, if I feel like I want to follow up if I haven't heard back in, say, a week.

I do what Craig does. Sometimes I'll also add a future start date if I want to help myself to be patient in waiting for a reply. That keeps the item from appearing in my waiting-for context until the start date arrives.

I have a @waiting context too, but I often assign one of my people contexts instead if I'm waiting on someone I work with regularly.

For example, if my coworker Chad is handling some portion of the project, I'll assign @Chad. The next time I have Chad on the phone, or on iChat, or see him at a meeting, I can just pull up my @Chad context to see all of the things related to him, including tasks I'm waiting for him to finish.

I guess the main difference is my @Waiting context is on hold and the @Chad context isn't. So anything with @Waiting doesn't show up in my working context view; I only see the items in my weekly review (when I check my on hold items). So for me, the @Waiting context gets used more for long term actions (e.g. Wait for W-2 forms @waiting), where as my @Chad context is something I want to see everyday (e.g. Wait for Chad's library code changes @Chad).

-Dennis

[QUOTE=Toadling;39550]
I guess the main difference is my @Waiting context is on hold and the @Chad context isn't.[/QUOTE]

That is a difference with my usage. I don't put any contexts on-hold.

This is the perfect argument for allowing items to belong to more than one context, so that a "waiting for" item tasked to Jeremy can belong both to a "waiting for" context and to a "Jeremy" context.

As a distant second preference, the ability to search the entire file instead of the current perspective would work, but I like multiple contexts better.

Not pure GTD, I know, I know, but it would work for moi.

Why not just make a Jeremy context inside the Waiting For context, a Jeremy context inside the Agenda context, then select both the Agenda : Jeremy and Waiting For : Jeremy contexts for simultaneous viewing? You can look at the top-level Waiting For context to see everything you're waiting for, you can look at the Agenda : Jeremy context to see the things you want to work on with Jeremy next time you're together.

[QUOTE=Jody Severson;39693]As a distant second preference, the ability to search the entire file instead of the current perspective would work...[/QUOTE]

This already exists, doesn't it? Just use the "All Items" default perspective and then search. Or am I misunderstanding?

-Dennis

Dennis: folks want the option to have the search tool default to a whole-database search. Same results as your method, though. (I'm assuming they want completed actions excluded from the results.)

In any case, it's one of the feature requests we have in the development database...

[QUOTE=Brian;39703]Dennis: folks want the option to have the search tool default to a whole-database search. Same results as your method, though. (I'm assuming they want completed actions excluded from the results.)

In any case, it's one of the feature requests we have in the development database...[/QUOTE]

Ah, I see. Thanks, Brian. I'm glad to hear this is under consideration, as long as OmniFocus doesn't lose the ability to limit the search scope to a selected folder; I actually find myself using that more often than I think I'd use "Search All".

As an aside, I think the current "All Items" perspective includes dropped and completed items. So I assume that option would remain in addition to the proposed "default whole-database search sans completed actions" feature mentioned above? Of course, it's probably too early to really go into much detail. I'm just thinking out loud again. :)

-Dennis