OmniFocus wants to have just one next action no matter if the project is parallel or sequential. Won't there be more than one potential next action if the project was parallel?
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!
|
|
FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
How is next "next action" relevant in a parallel project? | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
Member
2009-05-17, 07:28 PM
OmniFocus wants to have just one next action no matter if the project is parallel or sequential. Won't there be more than one potential next action if the project was parallel?
Post 1
|
Member
2009-05-18, 01:19 AM
Next action in a parallel project allows you to prioritize tasks based on what you would like to work on next in a project, even though there are no dependencies to force you to complete the top task (next action) in the list first. Sequential projects, as I expect you are aware of, block all subsequent tasks in the list until the next action is completed.
Where this comes into play is how you want to filter, through a perspective or the view bar settings, your action lists. Viewing with a 'Next Action' filter will narrow the choices made available to you as only the top, next action will appear in the list, regardless of the project setting for Parallel or Sequential. Viewing with an 'Available' filter will give you the next action in a Sequential project and all available actions in a Parallel project. The above assumes that no tasks are blocked by a start date and time. The 'Remaining' filter will show all tasks remaining in a project, even those tasks blocked by a start date and time and tasks blocked in a Sequential project. While you did not ask about it, the third type of OF 'project' is the Single Action List. All tasks in a SAL will appear in both the 'Next Action' and 'Available' lists as all tasks in a SAL are considered to be completely independent of the other tasks in that SAL.
Post 2
|
Member
2009-05-19, 07:33 PM
Thanks Greg. That clears it up for me.
Post 3
|
Member
2010-06-06, 09:03 AM
Quote:
I seem to recall reasoning from the OmniGroup for having all available SAL actions shown, with a 'next action' filtered applied. It may be useful at times for that to be so, but perhaps a preference to allow the top (list-wise) available action in a SAL (only) to show up with a 'next action' filtered applied. Heck, maybe even a preference to have OF randomly pick what would show up as one's next action, all else being equal. My thinking behind the latter, is that sometimes I'll do a search, and the darndest SAL item shows up that I had forgotten about (I have long lists, mind you). (I've submitted these ideas as OF feedback recently.) Bob
Post 4
|
Member
2010-06-06, 09:44 AM
The primary functional distinction between a single action list and a parallel project is that which you propose to eliminate with this option. Why not just change it to be a parallel project? Do you always want to work in this fashion, or only occasionally? If that latter, why not just switch between parallel and SAL as needed?
Post 5
|
Member
2010-06-06, 01:02 PM
Quote:
Because SALs have a meaning to me, distinct from projects (in the way I wrote above). Quote:
I do understand that there may be a slight distinction between a parallel project and it's manually-set next action, vs. a SAL and it's potential next action, but for me that distinction falls apart in my practical use. I see the value in manually setting the next action of some parallel projects, and also see no reason why I shouldn't be able to do the same for SALs; I could use that same sense of 'here is what would benefit me to do next in this SAL' by manually setting its next action. And for those who prefer to see all available SALs as next actions, I'm fine with that, but would prefer an option (via a preference) for SALs to behave like parallel projects in this respect. Thanks for your input. Bob Last edited by omnibob; 2010-06-06 at 01:07 PM..
Post 6
|
Member
2010-06-06, 06:06 PM
Quote:
I don't see anything wrong with the optional notion that the top item on the list is the one you think ought to be done first. If you're doing GTD on paper as described by the book, you certainly have to write something down as the first action on the list! Quote:
Quote:
Is this option all or nothing, or on a project-by-project basis, like the project auto-completion?
Post 7
|
Member
2010-06-07, 07:58 AM
Quote:
Your points are well made. I suppose I can add " SAL" to the end of the title of a SAL that I've converted into a parallel project (I already do that for SALs; it is slightly redundant, but works for me in SALs). I think my main goal is to be able to be able to effectively put attention to (and get done) the mind-numbing long lists that SALs can become. I have had some success with using the next review period to somewhat stagger my SALs so that I can review some of them in depth one week, others on another, etc. And then for my next-action randomization idea, I could take a whack at AppleScript. Thanks for your useful feedback. Bob
Post 8
|
Member
2010-06-07, 09:17 AM
Trying to suss out what might be different between our practices... it occurs to me that almost all of my SAL actions are done either because I work the bin to completion (the grocery list, for example), or they get done because they have a start date and get worked off the daily tickler perspective (household work, paying bills, taking care of the animals, etc.) As long as I'm careful about not having too many things start at the same time (see Curt's prime number review scheduling trick for a great idea here) I don't have to fool around with reordering the lists or even really face them in their entirety. It does help to have a bit of discipline about knocking the items off as soon as they show up on the tickler list.
Post 9
|
Member
2010-06-07, 03:51 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Bob
Post 10
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is it possible to have parent action of group in "Project" column? | julienl | OmniFocus 1 for Mac | 3 | 2012-03-01 01:52 AM |
UI prob: app prefs say "autocomplete", project inspector says "don't". Former wins. | MichaelJohnston | OmniFocus for iPhone | 14 | 2010-03-25 11:49 AM |
Can you make an action "parallel" in a project that is serial? | tlester | OmniFocus 1 for Mac | 1 | 2008-10-13 07:34 AM |
canīt assign a project to an action in "context mode" | levy | OmniFocus 1 for Mac | 5 | 2008-01-07 12:59 PM |
Difference between "single actions" and "parallel" projects? | jasong | OmniFocus 1 for Mac | 3 | 2007-09-08 05:57 AM |