[macula]

In the filters bar, both the Project Filter and the Context filter (in the planning and context modes respectively) provide special options for projects and filters that are on hold. These filters are conveniently and intuitively placed under "Remaining Projects" and "Remaining Contexts" respectively.

The Availability Filter, however, does not provide this functionality: Actions belonging in projects on hold, or assigned to contexts on hold [hereafter referred to altogether as "tasks on hold"] are not included under "Remaining Tasks". Instead, they are included under "All Tasks" and thus mixed up with completed tasks.

As a result, the definition of "Remaining" is ambiguous and depends on whether one refers to Projects/Contexts on one hand, or Tasks on the other hand. One thus runs the risk of missing a task on hold, erroneously expecting that it would have appeared under "Remaining tasks".

It would be great therefore if the Availability Filter included an option for "Remaining > On Hold" actions.

Thank you.

[ksrhee]

Originally Posted by macula

In the filters bar, both the Project Filter and the Context filter (in the planning and context modes respectively) provide special options for projects and filters that are on hold. These filters are conveniently and intuitively placed under "Remaining Projects" and "Remaining Contexts" respectively.

The Availability Filter, however, does not provide this functionality: Actions belonging in projects on hold are not included under "Remaining Tasks". Instead, they are included under "All Tasks" and thus mixed up with completed tasks.

As a result, the definition of "Remaining" is ambiguous and depends on whether one refers to Projects/Contexts on one hand, or Tasks on the other hand. One thus runs the risk of missing a task on hold, erroneously expecting that it would have appeared under "Remaining tasks".

It would be great therefore if the Availability Filter included an option for "Remaining > On Hold" actions.

Thank you.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here? "Hold" option only applies to projects or contexts, and they are under remaining projects/contexts under each filter. I don't think there is a way to "hold" an action item under OF; so, there is no option under availability filter. It's either available or next action.

[macula]

Originally Posted by ksrhee

I'm not sure what you are talking about here? "Hold" option only applies to projects or contexts, and they are under remaining projects/contexts under each filter. I don't think there is a way to "hold" an action item under OF; so, there is no option under availability filter. It's either available or next action.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. By "tasks on hold" I refer to tasks within projects or hold, or assigned to contexts on hold.

I have edited my post to better convey this.

Given this clarification, what do you think about the suggested feature?

Thank you.

[ksrhee]

Originally Posted by macula

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. By "tasks on hold" I refer to tasks within projects or hold, or assigned to contexts on hold.

I have edited my post to better convey this.

Given this clarification, what do you think about the suggested feature?

Thank you.

Thanks for the clarification. I see what you mean now. I would suggest the following since the tasks under hold projects/contexts shouldn't really be seen with other action items (since you can't really act on them until hold is broken).

Any status
Remaining

Next Action

Available

Hold
Completed

This way you can isolate the actions under hold projects/contexts w/o interfering with other items.

What do you think?

[macula]

That sounds very much in the right direction, and you're right to point out that tasks under projects/contexts on hold shouldn't be displayed together with other action items.

For the sake of consistency, however, I would apply your suggestion not only to the "Availability Filter", but also to the "Projects Filter" and the "Contexts Filter." In other words, I suggest that OmniFocus move "On hold" a level higher and outside the scope of "Remaining Projects" and "Remaining Contexts."

To summarize the suggested categorization:

PROJECTS FILTER
Remaining
- - - Active
- - - Stalled
- - - Future
On Hold *****
Abandoned
Completed

CONTEXTS FILTER
Remaining
- - -Active
- - -Stalled
On Hold *****
Abandoned

AVAILABILITY FILTER
Remaining
- - -Next Action
- - -Available
On Hold *****
Completed

[ksrhee]

I just noticed something. In the project mode, the actions under projects on hold do show up under "remaining" filter under the Availability filter.

So, it looks like project/context mode filters operate differently. I wonder if this is by design or a bug?

[macula]

Yes, this is exactly what I mean. The Context Filter and Project Filter subjugate "on hold" under "remaining," whereas the Availability Filter does not.

To my mind, this is a bug, and it persists in OF 1.8a.

[malisa]

I'm not following at all what you want and what you as a problem.

I'm going to stick to planning mode.

If I set the Project Filter to Remaining, I get all the projects that are not complete. This includes active project, projects on hold, an projects with a future start date. If I set the Availability Filter to Remaining, it works in a similar fashion. It includes all actions that are not complete. This includes actions that are available or those that are on hold (because either the project is on hold, the context their in is on hold, or they have a future start date.)

Remaining, in my mind, means incomplete.

If I want to see the projects that are on hold, etc. but only want the actions that are available, then I keep the Project Filter on Remaining but change the Availability Filter to Available. This removes actions that I can't do because the context is unavailable or the start date hasn't arrived.

If I want to only see project that are 'available' (aren't on hold, don't have a future start date), then the term for that for projects is active. If I set the Project Filter to Active. From there, the Availability Filter works exactly as previously described.

Active (for projects) and Available (for actions), in my mind, means 'not grayed out'. I think the terms are interchangeable. Of course there's the probability that I'm missing something there.

Are one of these scenarios not what you are experiencing, or what you're experiencing, but not what you expect?

(I've just had the epiphany that responding to posts like this helps me really learn more about the software, so...thanks.)

ETA: Reading back over your post, maybe it's that On-Hold is 'called out' as a separate option for projects, but not for tasks. I'd bet that's because you may want to specify ONLY on hold projects for review purposes, but probably not tasks that are on hold. (On hold, in that case, means specifically placed on hold. It does not include projects with future start dates.) The other reason that it's 'called out' as a separate option for projects is...only projects can be placed on hold (and contexts), actions can't.

I'm thinking one related point, but I don't think it's the main point, that Macula is making is the arrangement of On Hold ON the Project Filter. But it's arrangement shows you that On-Hold is a sub-set of Remaining. The Filter shows you the hierarchy.

I think what Krshee is proposing, which I'm not entirely sure is Macula's main issue either, is that there be a similar option under the Availability Filter. I'd say that IF that was added 'Unavailable' would be suitable. Assuming that you want items that are both unavailable because of future start dates, items that are unavailable because of being blocked in a sequential project (I hadn't considered those earlier), items that have future start dates. Or would you want each of those to have their own filter status?

I look at that stuff during reviews and couldn't see needing separate statuses for them, personally.

[macula]

Malisa,

You will forgive me for admitting that I have too much on my plate right now to read through your labyrinthine response. But here is the lowdown on this exchange between ksrhee and me, which is indeed unnecessarily verbose and complicated for a relatively simple matter. (Mea culpa).

Summary of the problem:

1. Select "Context Filter: Remaining"
Result: Contexts "on hold" are displayed in the sidebar.

2. Select "Context Filter: Remaining" and "Availability filter: Remaining"
Result: Actions belonging in contexts that are "on hold" are not displayed.

I consider this to be a bug, in the sense that "remaining" is applied ambiguously.

The suggested modification is twofold:

a. Remove the "on hold" context and project filters from the scope of "remaining". In other words, filtering by "remaining" contexts or projects should prevent the display of "on hold" contexts and projects, respectively.

b. Add an "on hold" option in the "availability" filter, which would prevent the display of actions belonging in contexts or projects that are "on hold."

I hope this makes sense now.

[malisa]

Originally Posted by macula

a. Remove the "on hold" context and project filters from the scope of "remaining". In other words, filtering by "remaining" contexts or projects should prevent the display of "on hold" contexts and projects, respectively.

Short version...then isn't that just "Active", rather than "Remaining"? Or you want Remaining to include future start dates, but not "On Hold" (due to project or context being on hold)?