[tacartwright]

Hm, yes and no. I am pleased that you’re trying to address the issue, and recognizing the sequential and parallel aspects of projects is good. However, I’m concerned that tagging whole projects as one or the other might be too simplistic.

Let me offer a contrived but realistic example. I decide to paint a room in my house. Right now, I can do certain tasks: estimate the square footage to paint, buy tools, pick the paint color, and so forth. But until I estimate the square footage AND pick the paint color, I cannot buy the paint, and until I buy the paint, I cannot do the painting. This painting project is neither strictly sequential nor parallel, but rather has elements of both. And note how some tasks (e.g., buying paint) may depend on more than one prior task being completed.

Also, when a project has parallel tasks, there is no one “next action”. At the beginning of my painting project, I have three next actions: estimate, buy tools, pick color. Why should one of those actions be privileged over the others (unless I set different priorities, or some tasks are out-of-context, or some other factor tips the balance)?

Now, please understand me, I realize that this is a complex model to build an interface for. I am a software developer myself and I recognize pain when I see it!

But just because it’s complex doesn’t mean it isn’t a key part of the problem domain. Almost every real project that I do has both sequential and parallel elements to it, just like my painting example.

So, I will try to think of interface ideas for dealing with a true DAG model of tasks. First, I need to look at what you (collectively) have done with OmniPlan! And if you guys want to talk about it more, we could arrange a phone call or something; email/forums are handy but sometimes tedious to discuss design ideas.

— Tim