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

 
Omnifocus 2 Projects and Contexts need to be sortable Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
I have been reading back over this thread and I can see that I haven't helped it to stay on track. The main reason I haven't is that I raised an example of the dinner party which didn't in any way relate to the issue that I raised at the start of the thread, namely that contexts, which may have actions associated with more than one project, will need to be sorted at times to be workable.

Just to put the dinner party example to bed, catrijn of course explained, with excellent use of the program, how to enter the events leading to the dinner party into its project in planning mode. And of course since all the phone calls required to be done for the dinner party have been sorted in the project they appear sorted in the context. And he made a further good point that even if I cannot get Omnifocus to notify me at a point in time where I may need to branch based on an event, at least I can choose to look at the Due perspective to see what deadlines exist. Sorry catrijin for not acknowledging both contributions of yours before now.

Sorry to do this everyone but I think it is important to point out, despite the fact that I haven't helped this thread, that I have raised a perfectly ordinary example (not obscure) where sorting of actions within contexts would be preferable and where such sorting will not already have happened in planning mode. And the example is going on a shopping trip to a number of stores for items that relate to multiple projects. No-one has commented on this example yet. Please don't let the discussion cease prematurely because I raised an example that was not related to my proposition.

I can see that there are people on this list who are very good at seeing how to apply Omnifocus to an issue and I invite them, if they have any ideas, to explain how my simple shopping trip can be handled by the program. To me Omnifocus does not seem to be ready to handle situations like this for two reasons:
1. It's a job where you need to spend time with a map to decide on the order of the actions.
2. Having done so Omnifocus won't let you store what you have determined to be the best order to complete the actions. Thus it would be preferable to be able to sort the contexts and to add notes to them in advance of the trip.

Just in case anyone is interested, I have made a demo interface for sorting (manual and automatic) and have made a movie explaining how it works. I have linked to the movie in the other thread called "How to (Elegantly) Implement Manual Sorting of Context Actions. If you want to talk design can you reply in the other thread and if you want to argue the issue of the necessity or not of sorting contexts, can you did it in this one? Thanks.

Last edited by usertech; 2013-02-19 at 12:48 AM..
 
Quote:
[what about a ]context for purchases requiring a car? Could such a context require trips to 7 or 8 stores? ... Is anyone on this forum going to argue that you should go to the stores without consideration of where they are
This, I think, is a better example to talk about trying to get to the bottom of what you want.

First, I think you would want to assume that multiple items in the list of 7-8 things are equally available - i.e. the dependencies are all open and there isn't any Project level priorities. Otherwise, your Project level dependencies would communicate what is really available for you to choose between.

This example in particular is also interesting because OF iPhone already has a mechanism to "sort" context based on location. If you've assigned location information to those 7-8 stores, then OF iPhone can show you that list sorted by distance giving you the closest store first. It basically creates a sorted route for you using distance. At each location, it would re-sort the list.

So, you could consider this location based scheme an acknowledgement that Omni sees some value in being able to sort Context.

A manual sort might enable you to dynamically sort that list based on something OF doesn't know anything about - for instance on a Sunday, several of those stores might not be open or might not be open until 11, 12 or 1pm. Something that might feel ridiculous to record in planning mode - or ridiculous to think that OF would have a place to record such information.

Having said all that, let me praise you on being able to hit 7-8 stores in one errand run. You are the Errand Master! :-) I'm lucky to actually get to 2 stores and actually find what I need on a given errand run. (sorry, just poking fun... not meaning to detract from this better example)
 
blewis I will have to change my login from usertech to ErrandsMaster!

Has anyone watched the movie I made which provides ideas about how the sorting in Omnifocus could work, both manual and automatic, in both context and planning mode? If you have any comments or suggestions please reply in the other thread (which perhaps, uninspiringly, is entitled "How to (Elegantly?) Implement Manual Sorting of Context Actions". In fact the movie I created is not limited to contexts or just manual sorting - it suggests an interface that would facilitate rich sorting in Omnifocus).

blewis. Interesting point about the use of location in the iPhone version. The iPhone version allows you to locate each context on a map and when you press on Map in the main menu you will see the locations of any contexts whose locations are within range of your current location. In a sentence it's "What jobs can I get done now since I am within range of where some of them need to be done?" Of course that feature is about seeing CONTEXTS not actions on a Map and won't help someone to decide on the order they ought to buy items from various stores (unless each store is given its own context which would elevate each to a status which would probably mean that you went to them all the time. And if that was the case you would no longer face the issue of deciding on an order to go to them that is the premise of my example). It may seem like a cool feature but how many people's contexts are not linked to places which they would already be aware provide them the chance to complete actions? And if you don't realise that you have actions to do in a context, will you remember to look at the Map feature to be reminded? Probably not. I suspect it's a feature which no-one is using…. although it probably sold a few copies of the app.

I want to put on the record another reason why we need sorting of contexts. Another reason we need it is that in many situations, as whpalmer4 mentioned earlier in this thread, you are already looking at several contexts to decide which action should come next. When sitting in front of your computer at work (for those who have the chance to work with Macs, if not at home), you may be in a position to complete actions from several contexts - perhaps an email context, phone context, meeting context, or a context of items to cover with your partner or boss or family member. Considering that the projects that these actions come from may not be sequential, and even if they are you can still have more than a couple of items in a context like a Phone context, you already have a real choice in deciding which action from all of these contexts to perform next. Why add the burden, to make the decision, of requiring the scanning of all items in all contexts, just because each context cannot be sorted? As I will argue in more detail further down in this email, there are so many separate responsibilities that are unavoidably yours in Omnifocus that I can see little reason why Omnifocus shoudn't make some of them easier.
 
Usertech, I kind of see what you're getting at with these last few examples, but my experience is that the automatic sorting options provide enough control for me. Manual sorting in more than one place (i.e., project and context rather than just project) would (for me) encourage task shuffling to get exactly the right order in lieu of just working on things. I take advantage of the fact that, if tasks are indistinguishable under the current sort scheme for context view, they revert to the order of projects. So by putting my folder of work projects before my folder of personal projects, work tasks show up before personal tasks (all else being equal).

Perhaps an example will clarify? One of the main views I work from I call 'Priority', someone else here described it as Important and/or Urgent, I don't remember the details. It's basically context view, group by flag, sort by due. I then select which contexts I'm currently working with in the sidebar to limit the tasks. This produces a list in four sections 1) flagged, with due date, ordered by due date; 2) flagged, no due date; 3) not flagged but due date set, ordered by due date; 4) not flagged, no due date. Usually 1-3 are small enough to fit on the first screen if I'm working on Mac, but 4 is huge and goes on and on. So I work roughly from the top, although overdue items almost always are my first target. If I catch up enough that group 4 is showing, I know that tasks for higher-ranked projects (top of project list) will come first. If something is down off the first screen, I probably don't need to think about it right now. If the list of important and/or urgent things is still too big, I'll make a decision about which project(s) I'm going to work on, focus down to those, and then go back to the working view. So as long as I'm using the review process to flag and add due dates appropriately, I can look at just one screen of tasks, roughly sorted by importance - they don't have to be in the exact order I'm going to do them.

For the errands...
Nested contexts for individual stores might be a good idea, particularly if they are frequently used and often there is more than one task/item at the same store. I don't tend to do this myself, though, as it doesn't fit my working style. I moved my grocery list out of OF because it became too cluttered for me; and aside from that my errand list tends to be small enough to just put the location details in the task description.

In addition, I think there are some serious interface issues to consider. Suppose I turn on manual sorting while I have Focus limited to just a few projects, and rearrange my tasks. What should happen when I switch back to displaying all projects again? Should all the formerly hidden tasks be at the bottom? What if they were at the top before? What if they were originally interspersed with the rearranged tasks? Sorry if you addressed this in the video, I haven't watched it yet.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by usertech View Post
I want to put on the record another reason why we need sorting of contexts. Another reason we need it is that in many situations, as whpalmer4 mentioned earlier in this thread, you are already looking at several contexts to decide which action should come next. When sitting in front of your computer at work (for those who have the chance to work with Macs, if not at home), you may be in a position to complete actions from several contexts - perhaps an email context, phone context, meeting context, or a context of items to cover with your partner or boss or family member. Considering that the projects that these actions come from may not be sequential, and even if they are you can still have more than a couple of items in a context like a Phone context, you already have a real choice in deciding which action from all of these contexts to perform next. Why add the burden, to make the decision, of requiring the scanning of all items in all contexts, just because each context cannot be sorted? As I will argue in more detail further down in this email, there are so many separate responsibilities that are unavoidably yours in Omnifocus that I can see little reason why Omnifocus shoudn't make some of them easier.
I can create a perspective showing only the multiple contexts I can do at work (work, Mac, Phone, Online, Work Agenda.

Creating perspectives allows you to create perspectives showing multiple contexts or multiple projects without needing to switch between contexts. You can also add a keystroke to automatically invoke it or put a perspective icon on the toolbar for quick and easy access. I can scan all available tasks in this perspective with just one click or keystroke. I don't need to click between all the different contexts. There's no friction here.


I'm going to guess and think that manual sorting in context will imply a sense of importance to tasks placed higher on the list?

But sometimes I'll ignore the topmost task and just do the third task. Maybe the third task just shot up in importance because my boss called me and told me that the task deadline has been moved up 3 hours and I need this done now before the rescheduled meeting. This just basically destroyed any manual context sorting with one phone call from the boss (or anyone).

Manual sorting sounds like more "busy bee" work for me. I look like I'm busy because I'm fiddling and tweaking my projects and contexts but I'm not really getting anything done. That creates more friction for me. Life is too dynamic and it can and will destroy manual sorting in a heartbeat.

But I guess manual sorting must be the "in thing" and some users are asking for it. Yet no one has made a program with manual contextual sort.
 
A few comments in response to you catrijn.

Thanks catrijn for explaining how you create a context view which is more useful. It's all helpful to hear how people are using the program.

I just want to point out that the thing that is making your context view more effective is the flagging of actions. Now let me get myself in trouble. Task management, when it comes to the moment of doing actions, is all about choosing the best possible next action to complete. And contexts assist that task by identifying which categories of actions are eligible to choose from and by eliminating, through non-selection, those that are not suitable. And if that's the whole business of task management, what is flagging really all about? I put it to you that it's just a way that people overcome the deficiencies of the existing context view to make a list of actions to complete next (even if you cannot currently then order them). So I applaud your use of the feature to deal with the current deficiencies catrijn but don't think that flagging is an effective alternative to the sorting of contexts.

Even if sorting of contexts were an available feature, I would still suggest that flagging remain though, because it could provide, with alterations, something which even a sorted context view cannot achieve, and that is to enable (with the addition of sorting!!!) the preparation of an ordered list of items that go ACROSS CONTEXTS. Here is how I would alter how it works. I would remove Flagging from all user created perspectives. It would only exist in its own default perspective. Then in its perspective I would have the same settings as it has now with one change: - Context filter set to Remaining (as it is now), Grouping set to Ungrouped (instead of by Context as it is now), Sorting is set on first entry to flagged as by Due (as it is now) but once the first action is dragged it changes to Flagged Order and subsorts by Due. All the other settings are the same as they are now - Availability filter is set to Remaining, Status Filter is set to Flagged, and Estimated Time Filter is set to Any Duration. I would also ensure that Set Flag and Flagged icons could not be removed from the toolbar since the flagged feature would be a fundamental part of using context mode in my view. Even with such a feature I think that individual contexts should be sortable because there will often be situations, even if you have the choice of contexts, where you choose to complete actions only from one context until all from that context are complete.

Now this Flagged perspective would become out of date, in that you wouldn't "notice" when new actions added to projects become actions that you might wish to flag. I therefore think that to live in this flagged view would not be the best way to operate. In my redesign, flagged view would be only for sorting flagged items. So if the Flagged perspective isn't where you live, then where should you live? I think that you should live in the context view (where you will notice newly added actions). But here is my suggested trick. Why not have the option of sorting your contexts by Context of Next Flagged Action? What is Context of Next Action? It's the context which contains the first item in the flagged items list (after sorting). Don't panic, not ALL your contexts would not be sorted according to the order of flagged actions, but just the context associated with the first item within your flagged actions list. And when that top context's top action was marked complete (easy to find, it's always at the very top) the next flagged action's context would be put at the top of the list where of course the action would be the first item in the context, and so on. If there were multiple sort fields, allowing subsorting (as I have in my video) only the first sort field would be able to sort by Context of Next Flagged Action. It could never be a subsorting field. To those who say this would interrupt the user I remind you that in this scenario the interruption caused by the movement of one context to the top of all contexts would be minimised if the user was only viewing a subset of contexts, as is usually the case. And if the user never flags actions they will never see any context move to the top of the list. Ok, NOW I think some of you will think I am nuts. But why am I nuts if THE WHOLE BUSINESS OF TASK MANAGEMENT IS TO CHOOSE THE NEXT APPROPRIATE ACTION ACROSS CONTEXTS? Wouldn't a flagging system which worked this way do what people are trying to make it do now but do it better? (If others use flagging for any purpose other than to bring the next actions they wish to complete into greater focus, please educate me so I may not be so dogmatic!)

As to the interface issues you raise catrijn, I would recommend that you watch the video! (Please everyone watch the video!! I have sweated it, now all you need to do is cook popcorn and find a comfortable chair!). But for those who don't watch the video here is a reply to catrijn's question.

Question - "Suppose I turn on manual sorting while I have Focus limited to just a few projects, and rearrange my tasks. What should happen when I switch back to displaying all projects again?"

Answer - Its possible, in my suggested sort interface, to manually sort in planning mode just the actions from the projects being viewed, just as you can in the current version of Omnifocus (with one qualification, in my interface it's impossible, in manual sort mode, to limit which actions are viewed for the chosen projects, ensuring that all remaining actions are included in the manual sort). When you return to automatic sorting mode the focus can be restored, which might for example require that only next action items be viewed instead of all remaining actions. The selected projects would remain the same. The same, in my demo, happens in context mode. When you enter manual sort in context mode you can continue to view just some of your contexts but if you have limited the viewable actions within them, manual sorting will require that all the remaining actions for the chosen contexts be viewable, ensuring that whenever a user does a manual sort that they do it with full knowledge of all of their contexts' actions.

PS The video doesn't accurately show what would happen when you return to automatic sort mode from manual sort. What I suggest should happen is that you go back to all the settings you had before entering manual sort mode.
 
usertech, I watched your video and I have read through most of this thread. I have a few questions about your particular workflow; admittedly workflows are specific in that each of us find tools and techniques which allow us to perform actions more effectively.

1) What is your planning and execution process when using OmniFocus?

For myself, I plan my projects in planning mode and execute my project's tasks via context mode through specialized prospectives. With this being said, ideas do occur when not in planning mode. In these scenarios I use quick entry and/or if necessary I switch to planning mode to make an adjustment to a project.

2) How many project/tasks do you have?

Part of project management is, as you say, choosing from a list of actions/tasks to complete an move projects forward. However, it is also part of project management to know when to limit the amount of tasks you can handle.

3) Related to #2 are you using start dates and custom perspectives in OmniFocus to limit the items in you context view?

Priority is given to calendar items which can only be completed on a specific day, a firm due date, or conversely those not starting until a later date are not shown. These variables allow for an automated filtering by their importance. OmniFocus gives users the ability to create specialized perspectives and assign start dates in order to better limit the number of items in any given context list. For instance I can be at work and only see work related tasks and only those that are available to me for completion.

OmniFocus gives the user the ability to filter projects by using custom perspectives, limit visibility through assigning start dates, highlighting due tasks, and a catch all flagging option. I have not found a situation where I would have more than a reasonably small list which I could quickly scan and choose a task to complete in any particular context.

Now, I understand everyone has a workflow preference and I did find difficulties when I first approached GTD. I would suggest you continue to find elements which work for you, but consider many of the users here have worked with the software for a longer time than myself and possible you. There are many resources where I have found solutions to many problems I have had with managing projects.

I have two final offerings.

A) Your desire seems to echo the old mantra of assigning priorities to tasks which GTD was a solution for. If I remember correctly this is addressed within the first ten pages of David Allen's book Getting Things Done. The example of your shopping list route does not address potential changes in priorities -- after planing out and manually sorting all your store locations and beginning your errands you get a call and you need to pick up an item immediately at the store which is in the middle of your route; now what? Reorder your tasks? Plan the execution of the route again including the new information?... but IMMEDIATELY does not allow for this. Smaller scannable lists do allow for this type of flexibility.

B) To assist in your desire to have a specifically ordered list for shopping I have a resource for you to research. My prompt to search for this was that I needed to manage a grocery list from OmniFocus and share it with my wife who I can sometimes get to use the Reminders.app on the iPhone.

These are a set of three AppleScripts I found which send tasks to the Reminders.app and can sync task completion back to OmniFocus. I use it with a shared grocery list with my wife. Take what you will from these and I hope they help with your workflow.

https://github.com/ChewingPencils/om...s-to-reminders

In all your desire to have a specific list of priorities top to bottom is something I have needed to address personally as well. Contexts are flexible for a reason. This reason for me was when I realized life is also every changing and flexible as well and I could not make concrete plans which could stand against this level of unknown possibilities.
 
A couple of comments Dale.

Just as cartrijn did, you are pointing out that there are features in OF which do enable you to narrow down the number of actions within one context. My response would be though that there will be situations (and I have provided an example in another thread which you referred to of a shopping trip) where you won't make one context's list small enough and simple enough that sorting its items wouldn't be advantageous.

In addition I have pointed out that the challenge of choosing the next action to complete is a task that often involves multiple contexts, each of whose actions are not in any coherent order.

I am having trouble understanding why there is some distinction between choosing the next action to complete and dragging it to the top of a list (and so is Ken Case as you will see if you read on!). If I had to represent the logic being presented to me it would be that I need to choose the next action to complete but not express my choice by moving it.

Here is a quote from Ken Case, admittedly from 2007, which I just read in a thread that has risen back to the top of the forum.

"OmniFocus has a notion of priority already: it's the order in which you arrange your items. If you want something to have a higher priority, simply move it up in the list.

This gives you much finer-grained control than a typical priority system, which typically only has a few levels of priority: OmniFocus effectively has as many priorities as you have items.

Does that make sense?"


Why is prioritising in a project exercised by moving an action up and down, yet, when such priorities exist within a context we aren't allowed to express our priority by raising a task up and down? Does the dragging take longer than the choosing?

What would OF users say if OF suddenly chose to have the same mentality with projects as the program does with contexts? (You shouldn't need to order the items within projects. If your projects have too many actions just use some program feature to make your project smaller, like projects within folders and then just choose your next action! To those who say don't be ridiculous are you saying that complex situations of order can't exist within a context?)

In response to your comment Dale about what happens when your shopping trip is interrupted by your boss, I suggest, without being disrespectful, that you do what your boss says immediately. But after that, your life will be as it so often is again, you will be seeking to complete actions in a sensible order and the call from your boss during your shopping trip hasn't altered that reality. It mostly won't prevent you from again making sensible choices about how to order the rest of your day. It just highlights how much we can benefit from a program that effectively supports the prioritisation of tasks.
 
You do, whether you meant to or not, make a good point Dale. If you know already which action to do first do it and don't think about the others until you are forced to make your next choice. But often choosing what is first involves having insight into what ought to be 2nd, 3rd etc so why not store that insight, as you think it, as more often than not the order doesn't change. And when your day does change, often the change is only to insert one item further up your list.
 
I would also like to be able to sort the contents of a context sometimes.

The biggest reason we do not plan to add this feature in OmniFocus 2 is that it would require changing the database format, and THAT would require updates to the iOS apps and OmniFocus 1 and a lot of extra testing (and delay). We're trying to avoid that as much as possible right now.
 
 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Links from other apps to OmniFocus projects/contexts psidnell OmniFocus for iPad 6 2012-01-18 10:15 PM
Contexts on Projects avit OmniFocus 1 for Mac 7 2012-01-17 08:14 AM
Projects within contexts turpinm OmniFocus for iPad 3 2011-03-18 08:30 AM
Using Projects as Contexts blamb327 OmniFocus 1 for Mac 1 2009-10-15 04:41 PM
Sortable ad blocking list Handycam OmniWeb Feature Requests 1 2008-07-08 08:23 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:08 AM.


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