Quote:
Originally Posted by whpalmer4
But if you're only interested in Waiting:Joe, does it matter what is being shown in Waiting:Bill or Waiting? My suggestion was merely that you'd have everything separated out by context and could thus look at only the context of interest at the moment and more easily ignore the rest, instead of looking at an ungrouped list where you had to inspect each item to see if it had a context of Waiting:Joe...
|
I'm referring to an Agenda tree like the earlier poster suggested:
Agenda:
Joe:
Waiting
Bill:
Waiting
The advantages of this structure is that I can easily see everything I need for Bill or Joe, including waiting items.
However, when I do my daily review of my "Waiting" items, I can't see all of them easily without either seeing all the active Agenda items, or manually/perspectively selecting the Waiting only contexts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whpalmer4
Ah -- now that I reread the message to which you were responding, I see that that poster didn't have the structure I was envisioning (a waiting context with subcontexts for each person). My grouping suggestion wouldn't help there, I agree! But you could make a perspective that picked up only those subcontexts, right?
|
I could and I did, but then whenever I'd add a new Agenda/Waiting person, I'd have to update the perspective. It wasn't the most elegant thing.
I've also tried what you've suggested above:
Waiting:
Bill:
Joe:
But then, I don't have one place to look for my items for Bill or Joe and I'm maintaining two big unwieldy trees. I've since reverted to just using a single Waiting context, but I wish I didn't have to.
My suggested behavior would be for items in non-On Hold parent contexts to not show up when filtering Contexts by On Hold. Is there a downside to that that I'm not thinking of? In what circumstances would you want to see non-On Hold items when filtering by On Hold?