View Single Post
OK, I'm going to try to explain.

Let's say I'm going to put up new shelves in a room, and they require these actions.
Shelf Brackets (buy)
Shelves (buy)
Paint (buy)
Paint Shelves
Relocate Current Pictures
Install Brackets
Install Shelves

In this case there are somethings that are sequential, and some things that can be done in parallel. I obviously could Relocate Current Pictures at any point prior to Install Brackets. I could also Paint Shelves at any time prior to Install Shelves, but clearly after Paint (buy). I might buy paint at the paint store, brackets at the hardware store, and shelves at the lumber yard. There is no required sequence to those purchases, yet they precede some other actions but not all.

After looking at this, it is apparent that GTD (and OmniFocus) is a bit stilted in it's conception. Next Actions could be many things for any set of tasks (project). It is a bit artificial to create some action groups that are sequential and others that are parallel, as many projects contain some of both, ad to create "groups" just to separate them into parallel and sequential makes no sense, especially given one might find oneself inserting something sequential into a parallel group (or vice versa). In retrospect, I've would have thought Omni would have understood this and seen it coming, as they have OmniPlan, and thus have experience thinking this way. I've often thought that there should be overlap between OmniPlan and OmniFocus. Now I'm sure of it. Rarely is there such a thing as a "Next Action"; often there are many possible Next Actions in any project or even subproject, and what one does next depends on many other factors. Pert and Gantt charts illustrate this quite well. I think I'm heading of to a Project management app as those apps understand variable dependencies. I wish OmniPlan synced with iCal but apparently not yet.

I hope Omni can see this and work toward defining a convergent app. Project mgt with contexts. Include scheduling, estimating and tracking.