The Omni Group
These forums are now read-only. Please visit our new forums to participate in discussion. A new account will be required to post in the new forums. For more info on the switch, see this post. Thank you!

Go Back   The Omni Group Forums > OmniFocus > OmniFocus 1 for Mac
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
Ability to tag contexts Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Quote:
Originally Posted by michelle
Ok . . . I didn't give a great example. I should have put calls at the top of the hierarchy (Calls>Office>Fred). But it shouldn't matter because contexts will be completely customizable to fit your workflow.
(I apologize if I reply twice to this posting — I think that I didn’t save my first reply.)

Both your examples are just fine and both display the same issue that SpiralOcean and I are getting at. In a nutshell, contexts overlap in the real world.

If you have Calls>Office>Fred (instead of Office>Calls>Fred), then there’s an implied need for Calls>Home>Fred and Calls>Car>Fred and Calls>Elsewhere>Fred. The result is a huge and unmaintainable context hierarchy.

Tags, on the other hand, automatically allow overlapping contexts with far less maintenance. I can tag something with just Calls if I don’t care where I make the call from, or Calls AND Home if I see it in my Calls context, my Home context, and a Calls + Home context, should I be feeling so particular.

So, if I had to pick, I would pick context tags instead of hierarchies.

— Tim
 
The way the app is shaping up, you should be able to get away with 'Calls' in most cases. We have another axis on which to focus your action list so that you can avoid the whole A>B vs B>A problem. I don't think we are talking about that bit publically yet :)

Hopefully most people will have a fairly small set of contexts that express requirements for actionability rather some area of responsibility.

Still, there are cases where tagging or multiple contexts, etc. would be useful (say, if you sometimes have meetings with action items for Bob and sometimes with Jane, but you also might have some items require both of them to be present to be actionable).

There are a couple main problems with tagging; UI and taxonomy fiddling. We can obviously deal with some of the UI problems, but if we add tagging, how many people are going to spend hours developing and modifying complex tagging systems, endlessly agonizing over the taxonomy to apply to each and every task?

It's certainly possible to use tagging responsibly, but it seems far easier for it to become a productivity black hole.
 
I agree with Tim Wood that tagging (i.e., multiple contexts per task) is not necessary. It might be nice someday, once the semantics and UI are clearer.

By far, it is most important to me to be able to declare the contexts I’m in right now, to have that setting stick until changed, and to see no tasks outside my current contexts (see my first post in this thread).

— Tim
 
This is something that I had to speak out on- I firmly believe that multiple contexts needs to allowed. Multiple contexts and not allowing sub-projects are what hinders some of the new GTD apps that are now popping up all over.

Whatever system is implemented by Omni doesn't have to be overly complex, but it does need to be flexible enough to allow for multiple contexts for any one item. For instance, I have a list of projects (with the individual items already marked with their specific contexts- call, email, etc.) and I want to go through and mark which projects to focus on for my next meeting. I would like to go through those projects and tag them as "for next meeting". This would be a temporary context and would not affect the existing contexts. I would think that this could probably be accomplished with a flat context list. A hierarchal list could have some nice applications but might not be necessary (I personally would like to see it implemented though).

Without seeing the UI for this it is hard to say whether or not a work around is possible in its current state. I am all for keeping it simple, but not at the price of losing functionality that I need in certain situations.

From all of the little bits I am able to gather, OmniFocus is shaping up to be my "DreamApp". I just hope that it comes before my current system blows up on me.

Jason
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by michelle
What do you think about hierarchical contexts? Ex: Office>Calls>Fred

Michelle
The Omni Group
I think this would make it really more complicated. The beauty of GTD lies in it's simplicity. Having this as an option for some users might be ok, but not in a way that it makes working with OmniFocus more difficult.

Imdat
 
What about having a simple flat lists for contexts, and in the task list, allow more than one context to be selected for filtering?

That's all this really amounts to.

For people who don't want to use multiple contexts, they won't be affected.

For people who do want to use multiple contexts, they'll be crying for joy.

Here's another example where this would come in handy.

At work I have my list of projects. Sometimes we get interns in and they need simple things to do.

It would be great if I could plan out my projects, but give tasks the additional context of Intern.

If we get an intern in, I can view tasks by intern, and see the tasks that I could tell an intern to do.

Otherwise, I'm stuck with scanning 200 items for something that an intern could do.

All this concept is, is allowing multiple contexts to be assigned and filtered on.
 
Well laid out. This is a much better approach than heirarchy as much of this is not heirarchy based.

If I need to make a "call" it most likely will not be location context based, but in a few occasions it may be.

Heirarchy would seem to get in the way, but having facets would be a better approach as facets do not require irrelevant order. A facet would be location. So, "Location: office, Location: home, Location: travel, etc.". If I select my location as office I will get all calls for "Location: office" as well as ones with out any location selected. Location is also based on devices one has within reach, like a laptop, notbook, presentation, file cabinet, etc. so the facets could have a device needed element, "Device: laptop, Device: policy binder, etc.".

The heirarchy approach works well for physical space but since this is a digital tool facets are a much more flexible approach as well as using just plain flat tags.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiralOcean
What about having a simple flat lists for contexts, and in the task list, allow more than one context to be selected for filtering?
Excellent!

I always wonder about those people who have Work:Calls and Home:Calls ... when do they call the dentist? You know, they guy whose office staff seem to start work at 10 a.m., take a 3 hour lunch, and quit work at 4 p.m.

I don't have a set of Work contexts (my home is my work). I do see that sometimes we need to shut out things that we can't do at a certain time -- but there are times when we need to see everything, regardless of where we are.

Multiple context filters would solve this neatly ... eventually, we could even set up times for OmniFocus v9.5:) to let us know the dentist's staff is in, so call now.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiralOcean
What about having a simple flat lists for contexts, and in the task list, allow more than one context to be selected for filtering?
I think this sounds good, but I’m unclear about one thing. What does it mean to filter contexts by more than one context? Does it mean that ALL selected contexts must be on the task or ANY?

And do you have any interface thoughts for context selection? My big thing is that I want to see multiple contexts at once — all of the ones that apply now. Mine tend to overlap a lot. I’m not sure how multiple contexts and contexts tags would work together. What do you think?

— Tim
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacartwright
I think this sounds good, but I’m unclear about one thing. What does it mean to filter contexts by more than one context? Does it mean that ALL selected contexts must be on the task or ANY?
— Tim
What if you had a flat list of contexts, could select more than one context and any task assigned ANY of the contexts gets listed? Example: Select contexts "Home" and "Hobbies" and see all tasks assigned to either context. Would this eliminate the need to assign multiple contexts to the same task?

I'm not saying this is how it will be. Nothing is set in stone yet. We're just trying to figure out what will meet people's needs.
 
 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OmniFocus styling ability NightLion OmniFocus 1 for Mac 1 2010-03-09 08:53 PM
Would anyone else like to see the ability to exclude attachments? rmathes OmniFocus 1 for Mac 4 2010-03-02 03:31 PM
Ability to tag each entry in OmniOutliner 4 ? mr_projects OmniOutliner 3 for Mac 3 2010-02-11 01:34 AM
Ability to remove www.*.com shortcut Whomper OmniWeb Feature Requests 8 2009-05-27 06:22 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.