[brianogilvie]

Originally Posted by SpiralOcean

The problem with the way it is now is... I can't just do. I get to a action in a context, I perform it, but it's not completed yet because it needs a waiting for.

So I flip over to the projects to do some planinng... adding a waiting for.

Interesting--our workflows differ in this regard. If I get to an action and the next step is a waiting for, I will usually just change the context to my Waiting context, change the action text or note to indicate what I'm waiting for, and then set a start date and due date if either of those seem important. I don't do a full-fledged daily review very often, but I'll scan my Waiting context at the beginning of the day, and if I have a lull, to see whether I need to nudge anything along.

I can see that your approach has advantages in better tracking of exactly what has been done; so far I haven't needed that.

[SpiralOcean]

Originally Posted by brianogilvie

Interesting--our workflows differ in this regard. If I get to an action and the next step is a waiting for, I will usually just change the context to my Waiting context, change the action text or note to indicate what I'm waiting for, and then set a start date and due date if either of those seem important. I don't do a full-fledged daily review very often, but I'll scan my Waiting context at the beginning of the day, and if I have a lull, to see whether I need to nudge anything along.

I can see that your approach has advantages in better tracking of exactly what has been done; so far I haven't needed that.

I've fooled around with just changing the context. And maybe that's what I need to do.

However, when the waiting for involves another action to attempt a resolution, then I would enter a child again.

Example:

• Email 360 Systems about bug in software

Okay... so I send the email, change the action to waiting for with a due date.

I review it in my waiting for items a week later and haven't gotten a response from them.

So in your system I would change it back to email.

Hmmm... well... I guess I can give that a try.

Thanks for your notes Brian.

I'll see how this works. Maybe all that's needed is a paradigm shift for me. I'm happy to shift it, if it works better. :)

[SpiralOcean]

I'm glad you find the script useful (for new readers, it's available here). It broke for a day when Omni changed the AppleScript interface a couple of weeks back. Ah, the joys of alpha.

Yep... I can't wait to get back to it. I still think OF should have a grouping for it, or a filter... parents with no children. But your script does a beautiful job of marking them.

(It still amazes me that this alpha software is so good that I'm trusting it with dozens of active projects and hundreds of actions in the middle of the busiest time of my year. Those OmniGurus have some powerful mojo.)

Ditto that.

One side note... have you gotten the multi-quote to work? I'm just typing in the tags to split up? How does it work?

[brianogilvie]

Originally Posted by SpiralOcean

So in your system I would change it back to email.

Actually, you're giving me too much credit for tracking. In my workflow ("system" sounds too formal for what I do!), I'd just send the email and, perhaps, add a note in the Notes field that I had followed up on such-and-such a date. I'd leave the action in the Waiting context until I actually got a response or decided to take harsher measures. I don't bother to add a new action if I can actually do the action; I only add it if I don't have time to do the action. But since I glance over my Waiting context when I have some free time, I can usually send the reminders right away, instead of entering an action for them.

I'm OK with projects not having contexts or showing up in context lists when they're done. But I do agree with you that action groups should show up in their default contexts when all the actions in them are done. That's because I tend to conceptualize projects and actions as distinct critters, and action groups seem more like actions than projects to me. So we agree there. One think I liked about Life Balance was that it behaved as you like. One thing I disliked was that it didn't let me identify projects as a different kind of entity, so that I ended up prefixing all my projects with "(p)" to identify them visually.

[SpiralOcean]

Originally Posted by brianogilvie

I'm OK with projects not having contexts or showing up in context lists when they're done. But I do agree with you that action groups should show up in their default contexts when all the actions in them are done. That's because I tend to conceptualize projects and actions as distinct critters, and action groups seem more like actions than projects to me. So we agree there. One think I liked about Life Balance was that it behaved as you like. One thing I disliked was that it didn't let me identify projects as a different kind of entity, so that I ended up prefixing all my projects with "(p)" to identify them visually.

My thoughts exactly!

For me in LB... I created three tasks for a single project. And all of the started with a •. (my shorthand for stake in the ground :-)

• Project Name - Completed Projects Context
•- Project Name - Active Projects Context
•- Project Name - Home Context
First Task - Home context

It's rather insane. But that setup allowed me to do a couple things:
1. When adding tasks, the tasks would have a default context other than a Projects label.
2. When I would see the project name in my home context (I would know it was a project name because of the •- in front of it) I would know I either need to add more tasks to complete it, or I could complete it.
3. I had a context called, Active Projects. I could see all my projects by themselves in that context.
4. I could also force some priorities by placing a due date in the • Project Name, as all the children would default to that due date and push them up on the list.
5. When the project would show up in the completed project context, I would know I could complete it.

Insane in the membrane. It's partly the reason I'm so messed up know. ;-)

[curt.clifton]

Originally Posted by SpiralOcean

One side note... have you gotten the multi-quote to work? I'm just typing in the tags to split up? How does it work?

I think that multi-quote is for quoting multiple posts, perhaps by different authors, in a single reply, rather than breaking up a single reply into multiple quotes. For the latter I'm just copying and pasting tags.

[jasong]

Originally Posted by SpiralOcean

So the project looks like this:

• All Computers in Server room are hooked up to KVM
••troubleshoot 360 image server not displaying correctly on KVM -Work
••Order monitor cable for streamscope -Internet
•••waiting for monitor cable for streamscope to arrive -waiting for
••Order Gender changers for KVM cables-Internet

Adding a child to the Order monitor cable for streamscope, hides the parent item.

Please forgive me if this is a bit off-topic, but I'm curious: why create a child project "waiting for monitor cable for streamscope to arrive", rather than checking off as complete "Order monitor cable for streamscope" and entering the "waiting for..." as a parallel action?

Jason.

[dhm2006]

Originally Posted by SpiralOcean

One side note... have you gotten the multi-quote to work? I'm just typing in the tags to split up? How does it work?

-- question

Originally Posted by brianogilvie

Actually, you're giving me too much credit for tracking.

-- included for demo purposes

Originally Posted by curt.clifton

I think that multi-quote is for quoting multiple posts, perhaps by different authors, in a single reply, rather than breaking up a single reply into multiple quotes. For the latter I'm just copying and pasting tags.

-- answer

Thanks for explaining that. I have been wondering ...

I clicked on the multi-quote in Spiral Action's post, then in Brian's post and then on quote in Curt's post, and got them all in the order I clicked on them.

[sprugman]

As I said during the last round of this issue, I agree with SpiralOcean that action groups should pop into context view. Seems like the best compromise would be to pop them in if they have a context and make them non-blocking if they don't. That way people could use them either way.

[SpiralOcean]

Originally Posted by jasong

Please forgive me if this is a bit off-topic, but I'm curious: why create a child project "waiting for monitor cable for streamscope to arrive", rather than checking off as complete "Order monitor cable for streamscope" and entering the "waiting for..." as a parallel action?

Jason.

Hey Jason,

it's taken me a while to respond to this one because I wanted to respond with pictures.

Here is a web page with the explanation and example:
http://web.mac.com/stephenzinn/OmniFocus/OmniFocus.html