Originally Posted by JKT
What if it is an unnecessary part of the project, but would be icing on the cake if you could do it? E.g. a figure might not absolutely require redrawing, but if it was, it could be made to look better? That is, it is an aspiration, not a goal. (Note, not being au fait with GTD semantics, I suspect that this is probably not a strict part of the methodology but OF should be flexible enough to cater to people like me who don't want to be strait-jacketed by the one, true method while rigid enough to let people use it who do).
The point is that you should not be deciding what's on or off the list when you're getting things done. A commercial pilot does not think about the things that are on his takeoff/landing checklist; he just does them. He might want to add/remove/modify something on those lists, but he would never ever do that during an actual takeoff/landing.
I was recently in David's "GTD Roadmap" seminar ( www.davidco.com ). One point: he doesn't drive his major projects off of a GTD list; they are typically backed up with project descriptions in some other form. The typical form for David is a Mind Map. When he's in the trenches, he goes off of the lists; when he's reviewing his projects, he may modify his lists at that point. Much of the power of GTD comes from the separating of doing and planning.
OmniFocus should remain a simple application. It is not necessarily the entire existence system for your projects -- especially your major ones. Clearly, OmniFocus should allow one to create [launchable] references to whatever structures you use outside of OmniFocus to back up the simple GTD list of that project.
As you note, it may be useful to become au fait with GTD to understand this software better. In my model of the world, it is <i>precisely</i> the simplicity of things like OmniFocus that will make useful for the low-level implementation of my GTD system.
Read "Getting Things Done" and then "Ready for Anything."