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

 
Delegated tasks? Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
While OmniFocus was inspired by kGTD, we do hope that it will also be useful by people who don't follow strict GTD, or even very much of it at all. So go ahead and send us requests (ideally via email) for things that don't necessarily fit within "strict GTD". Where GTD and other approaches are in absolute direct conflict, we will probably choose in favor of the GTD approach, but when both can exist in harmony (or be toggled with a checkbox in the preferences pane), we'll try to please everyone.
 
Great to hear! Thanks.

Now about multiple contexts...

-g
 
I'd like to put my vote in favor of either mutlple contexts or, preferably, multiple inheritance in contexts (like Places in Life Balance). Since I work at a computer from home, traditional GTD contexts aren't that useful to me, but I still very much need to be able to filter a long task list down to a scanable number of tasks (10-20).

With LifeBalance (who's interface I despise), I found it useful to create places like this:

Clients
--- JPM
--- --- JPM Next
--- --- JPM Soon
--- Dante
--- --- Dante Next
--- --- Dante Soon
--- Toews
--- --- Toews Next
--- --- Toews Soon

Next
--- JPM Next
--- Dante Next
--- Toews Next

Soon
--- JPM Soon
--- Dante Soon
--- Toews Soon

---------------------------------

I used the Next and Soon places to say roughly "today" and "this week" as I was doing my reviews. The nice thing about this set up is that I could easily see what was going on with a particular client, or all of them, OR what was going on today and this week. I'm sure there are ways to achieve this with focusing/filtering, but jiggering around those controls all the time is not fun. Perhaps once perspectives are working well, I'll feel differently.

(dupe of feedback message)

Last edited by sprugman; 2007-07-21 at 02:06 PM..
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprugman
I used the Next and Soon places to say roughly "today" and "this week" as I was doing my reviews. The nice thing about this set up is that I could easily see what was going on with a particular client, or all of them, OR what was going on today and this week. I'm sure there are ways to achieve this with focusing/filtering, but jiggering around those controls all the time is not fun. Perhaps once perspectives are working well, I'll feel differently.

(dupe of feedback message)
I was a long time Life Balance user as well.

Your example is a merit of LB's method of context inclusion.
But your example is what you had to do to work around LB's shortcomings.

It sounds like you may be resisting OF. You may be resisting learning a new way of using a tool.

With your examples, it appears to me that OF covers most of your LB workarounds.

You are correct, the groupings do need fiddling, but in regards to the amount of workarounds you had to do in LB... it is easier in OF. It's like a great weight has been lifted from my chest in my conversion from LB to OF.

My sense is you had to create workarounds in LB, and your mind had to create new pathways to work in that application. You don't know if you can trust OF's way of doing things, or are just resisting doing it a different way because of the herculean effort you put into LB.

What would you think about posting a specific example of something you are attempting to do?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ethan
I want to be able to put (for example) something in @Calls (where in true GTD fasdhion I list all my calls) but also in @LosAngeles so I can see the call as part of the actions I need to complete in Los Angeles
Hi Ethan,

I had a similar need as I was getting to know getting things done. I had a "calls" context for "personal" and one for "work". OmniFocus will actually accommodate this, depending on how you want to see them. You can either have

@Calls
--@Los Angeles
--@Boston
--@New York

which, if you select "@Calls" will show you *all* the calls you need to make, and if you choose @Los Angeles will show you *only* the calls you can make while in LA.

Or you can have

@Los Angeles
--@Calls
--@Errands

which lets you see everything you need to do in LA, or only the calls you need make while in LA.

Here's what I do now, though. Instead of using Contexts for this, I use folders. I'd have an LA folder which contained all my projects I can only do while in LA. When I want to see what can I/do I need to do in LA, I double-click the LA folder (or choose View > Focus on selected project), and voila! my list of actions is instantly limited.

I now have a single Calls context, and if I'm at work, I simply double-click my Work folder and there are my calls for work, unpolluted with my personal calls.
 
The thing that I don't like about the folder approach is the number of steps it takes to change views.

1. go to project view
2. unfocus
3. find folder I'm interested in (which could take some clicking)
4. focus
5. go back to context view

That's fine if you're only changing folders a few times a day. I'd like to be able to be more dynamic than that, and to easily compare/choose between various folders. Robust Perspectives will probably help this when they come. And clearly, I'm still working on my structure/strategy for OF (as are we all)....
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong
Hi Ethan,

I had a similar need as I was getting to know getting things done. ()
You can either have

@Calls
--@Los Angeles
--@Boston
--@New York

()

Or you can have

@Los Angeles
--@Calls
--@Errands

()


You do not take into account that your choices are exclusive:
subdividing calls in your example would lead to a fragmented @Los Angeles context.
If I am at Los Angeles and want to go through my list of next actions for Los Angeles
I would have to look up @Calls - Los Angeles, @Errands - Los Angeles, etc.
If taking your second choice and I am in my office and want to check off some due calls
I would have to go through @Calls, @Los Angeles - calls, etc.

GTD is about being ready to perform and the basic premise is getting things off your head
in order to be present and focussed on the immediate task at hand.
Creating hughe hierarchies is uneffective and counterproductive.
Ethan's suggestion of multiple contexts is trying to keep things simple.

Last edited by Leonardo; 2007-07-24 at 12:19 AM..
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonardo
If I am at Los Angeles and want to go through my list of next actions for Los Angeles
I would have to look up @Calls - Los Angeles, @Errands - Los Angeles, etc.
If taking your second choice and I am in my office and want to check off some due calls
I would have to go through @Calls, @Los Angeles - calls, etc.
IMHO a better way to handle that would be to put calls you can only make in LA into a @LA context as "Call Bill about account" or whatever, leaving @calls for those calls you can make any time you have access to a 'phone. similarly, if it's an errand you can only do in LA put it in @LA as "Buy fish" or whatever, then keep @errands for errands you can run anywhere.

For me the key to deciding what context you put something in is "what can I absolutely not do without to perform this task". If you make that decision you don't really need to put anything into more than one context.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonardo
You do not take into account that your choices are exclusive:
subdividing calls in your example would lead to a fragmented @Los Angeles context.
If I am at Los Angeles and want to go through my list of next actions for Los Angeles
I would have to look up @Calls - Los Angeles, @Errands - Los Angeles, etc.
If taking your second choice and I am in my office and want to check off some due calls
I would have to go through @Calls, @Los Angeles - calls, etc.
Absolutely right, which is why I no longer use contexts in this way. I have a single Calls context. Much easier for me to deal with. The stuff I can do in LA are part of projects, and I focus in on those LA projects and see only the LA calls.

Jason.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_f
IMHO a better way to handle that would be to put calls you can only make in LA into a @LA context as "Call Bill about account" or whatever, leaving @calls for those calls you can make any time you have access to a 'phone. similarly, if it's an errand you can only do in LA put it in @LA as "Buy fish" or whatever, then keep @errands for errands you can run anywhere.
That pollutes your contexts, doesn't it?

You find yourself sitting in traffic (hey, it's LA, right?), and you look up your @LA context, and you see "Buy fish". Hm. Not very actionable right now. It's just reminding me of something I can't do. Not good.

But if you lookup @LA Calls, see "call Bill...", well, you pull out that iPhone, stick a headset in your ear, and you're off.

Jason.
 
 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AppleScript that adds Waiting For emails from Mail.app (delegated tasks) to OmniFocus simplicitybliss OmniFocus Extras 139 2014-01-16 12:25 PM
Delegated projects control EugeneB Applying OmniFocus 2 2012-06-30 03:39 AM
Script to add delegated tasks from entourage to "Waiting" context in OmniFocus tarun101 OmniFocus Extras 1 2010-05-21 08:09 AM
Unactive Items in Project View? Help dealing with delegated tasks... marshallj Applying OmniFocus 15 2009-06-26 08:40 AM
Delegated script Lutin OmniFocus Extras 5 2008-05-17 10:25 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.