View Single Post
The short version:

The definition of "next" ought to be: "The first available task in each project within the set of currently selected contexts."

What do you think?


The longer version:

"Next actions" don't work quite the way I expect:

They appear to be considered "next" by project, not by context. This results in some undesirable behavior.

Here's the scenario:

1) Create a parallel project P.
2) Create tasks A, B, and C in P.
3) Create a sequential project S.
4) Create tasks D, E, and F in S.
5) Assign tasks A, D, and E to context Foo.
6) Assign the other tasks to context Bar.

Now let's look in context view:

7) Select both Foo and Bar. The current system works fine here: A, B, and C are available, but only A is considered "Next" from its project. Similarly, only D is available, and thus "Next" in its project.

8) However, let's select just context Bar. This is where the current definition of "next" breaks down (at least in terms of GTD philosophy): there is no "next" task.

According to my understanding of GTD, "B" ought to be considered "next" when viewing (only) this context.

In other words, the "next" task really should only have any meaning within the currently selected contexts, not within a project. The definition of "next" ought to be: "The first available task in each project within the set of currently selected contexts."

This achieves the goal of "next" actions, which is to limit the field of available actions into something more manageable. The current implementation ties "next" too closely to a project, often causing projects not appear in context view simply because I'm looking at a narrow set of contexts.

I realize I can switch to view "available" tasks, but I find this rather defeats the purpose of "next" tasks.

(Formal feedback sent as well.)