Point taken! Nothing like a 'by definition' assertion to stir the vitals, is there? :)
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!
|
|
FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
whither the "super spiffy bucket icon"? | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
Member
2007-08-17, 01:27 PM
Point taken! Nothing like a 'by definition' assertion to stir the vitals, is there? :)
Post 31
|
Quote:
Other than this distinctive styling, we plan to (but don't yet) treat singleton actions as next actions. (That way, you can work your way through everything you have on your plate by looking only at your next actions.)
Post 32
|
Quote:
Post 33
|
Quote:
Post 34
|
Member
2007-08-20, 06:28 AM
Quote:
This is exactly what I want, though personally I don't care about the style. What I need is a way to view what's currently on my plate. My plate has all sorts of actions; I need to see them all. --Liz
Post 35
|
Member
2007-08-20, 11:54 AM
Agree -- this implementation would be excellent.
Also, in response to your comments, I've reconsidered my original statement and recant the assertion that next actions and singletons should be considered functionally separate. Having the option to color them differently is still useful for me, but considering them categorically different would only add unnecessary complexity to the system.
Post 36
|
Guest
2007-09-18, 12:00 AM
I think having the singleton projects how they are now works for some (I'm not 100% caught up on on all their current features) and I'm not against having a feature activated within preferences that allows you see all singletons in one left-pane item....(not mandatory though, please)
BUT, is there any way single actions can exist within folders without being converted into a project or having to live in a segregating singleton list? I currently use folders as a way to organize different responsibilities of my job and life....(i.e. Work, Personal, Financial, Reels, etc.) that do not really need GTD "action" verb titles. They are just organizational tools. At least that's what I see folders as being. And sometimes there are single actions that should be able to live within those organizational divisors. It seems like it's a little excessive to have to make a singleton bucket project within every folder that has single actions just so you can have them viewable in context....where ideally many thing should be done...especially single actions that can be done in contextually similar groups fairly quickly. (excuse the run-on sentence and elipses). I mean what if individual documents within a Finder folder had to be in a "Single Documents" folder within that original folder? Can't the project and single actions live peacefully together directly within folders? I know they can exist within project together, but then some of the parallel/serial visible feedback features are lost, and it doesn't look quite "right". Beau
Post 37
|
Quote:
Post 38
|
Member
2007-09-18, 04:03 PM
This single-action bucket thing is bugging me again, 'cause I just realized I can't put a single-action on hold, nor can I give it a date in the future and have it disappear into the pending filter.
Treating the bucket as a project means the items inside of it are second-class citizens to my projects. What is the justification for not being able to put a single action on hold, or being unable to mark a single action as pending by giving it a date in the future? Jason.
Post 39
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Send to Inbox" toolbar icon in Mail.app? | S. Esch | OmniFocus Extras | 0 | 2010-10-18 01:13 AM |
Feature request: "Bucket" default project type | Mitch Wagner | OmniFocus 1 for Mac | 14 | 2008-12-10 02:09 PM |
New "No Context" bucket has side effects | jasong | OmniFocus 1 for Mac | 4 | 2007-09-20 02:09 PM |