[Lizard]

Seems like that would be dangerous, unless it sorted the big ones to the top.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by Lizard

Seems like that would be dangerous, unless it sorted the big ones to the top.

Dangerous? Do you mean I might not see contexts with lots of actions (long graph bars) that are scrolled out of the view port?

If so, yes, I agree there is a chance that the contexts might not be seen if I don't scroll down. But "dangerous" sounds like too strong of a word to me. Unless there's some consequence I'm unaware of. ;-)

But anyway, sorting by number of actions with long bars on top would be a nice addition to the scrollbar idea. And it would make things look neater too (to satisfy my OCD).

-Dennis

[Lizard]

Yes, that's what I meant by dangerous. Not destroying data or stabbing you with pointy objects. Just lulling you into a false sense of having an area of responsibility under control when you don't.

[curt.clifton]

Sorting is tough, since subcontexts are indented under their parents, and parents may or may not show the counts of their children.

I also like being able to develop some spatial memory of which context is which.

Besides using a scroll area, an alternative way to shorten the list would be to provide an option to just show the parent contexts. Would that help?

[whpalmer4]

How hard would it be to flip the chart on its side, to match the aspect ratio of the display? The GTD "bed of nails" :-)

[curt.clifton]

Originally Posted by whpalmer4

How hard would it be to flip the chart on its side, to match the aspect ratio of the display? The GTD "bed of nails" :-)

Or they could extend from the top: stalactites of doom!

It would take significant effort to change the orientation. I'm using a list display for the bars. That won't work in with vertical bars.

[whpalmer4]

I suspected your answer would be something like that.

The list view (without scrolling, or a taller screen than mine) has the slightly perverse effect of encouraging one to tackle the contexts with the fewest remaining actions, to get everything back on the screen. Just the opposite of the intended goal, perhaps :-) Looking at my 65 contexts, I see only one that I no longer need, and don't see some that I will need sooner or later, so it isn't an theoretical issue for me!

Play the OmniFocus game! If the list fills the screen vertically, or one of the bars spans the screen horizontally, you've failed, your data gets wiped out, and you get a fresh start :-)

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by curt.clifton

Besides using a scroll area, an alternative way to shorten the list would be to provide an option to just show the parent contexts. Would that help?

That's not a bad idea. But I still like a scroll area the best, even at the risk of not seeing some of the longer bars immediately. I'd just have to remember to scroll through the whole list. :)

-Dennis

[curt.clifton]

Philosophically, I'm targeting a very quick heads-up display. It seems like tuning the widget so scrolling isn't needed would be the best approach for that. Besides hiding child contexts, another approach would be to let you select which top-level contexts should be included. Then a person could launch multiple instances of the widget side-by-side each showing a different set of contexts. How does that idea sound?

I'm not necessarily averse to scrolling, but want to explore the possibilities before sinking a bunch of time into it. I'd have to add manual resizing of the widget and deal with adjusting the bar lengths depending on whether or not the scroll bar is showing, show it's non-trivial.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by curt.clifton

Besides hiding child contexts, another approach would be to let you select which top-level contexts should be included. Then a person could launch multiple instances of the widget side-by-side each showing a different set of contexts. How does that idea sound?

That would work for me. Sometimes I forget how handy it is to open multiple instances of a widget.

-Dennis