In reading many of the threads, terms like "Pure GTD" or "Canonical GTD" sometimes come up such as the threads related to allowing more than one context / activity or allowing a priority to be specified for an activity.
Question: Does "Pure GTD" really exist? What would David Allen himself say?
Or, is GTD a set of principles and concepts that have some leeway for how it used?
I admit, it has been about 6 months since I have read Getting Things Done so I am a little out of touch with how "religious" or "strict" the methodology is presented there.
I don't remember too much discussion in that book about implementing it differently depending on whether a paper or electronic system is used. In a paper-based system, for example, a context hierarchy would be well thought out and an activity placed in one context because it wouldn't make sense to take time to physically manually re-write an activity description to put it into different folders. Also, in a paper-based system, priorities wouldn't need to be assigned if individual items were for example on indexed cards and could be rearranged.
I have read many of the articles from David Allen's website, and how he implements things using the Palm PDA seems to be evolving. How he would implement it on the PDA vs. paper would also probably have some differences.
So, when talking about how to implement GTD in Omni Focus, is "Pure GTD" something that really exists, or is there a lot of latitude for different GTD type programs to implement the details in different and innovative ways not specifically spelled out in the book?
I just get the impression that "Pure GTD" doesn't really exist in the strictest sense, and that when some people say that a concept isn't "pure" they don't realize that creativity and innovation in how GTD is implemented by any computer program are perfectly fine and can add a lot to the program's functionality and usefulness.
If David Allen himself were here, he might even request some of the features that some people consider "non pure GTD".
I think David Allen's website has a forum (for paying members). It would be interesting to hear his views on this.
Question: Does "Pure GTD" really exist? What would David Allen himself say?
Or, is GTD a set of principles and concepts that have some leeway for how it used?
I admit, it has been about 6 months since I have read Getting Things Done so I am a little out of touch with how "religious" or "strict" the methodology is presented there.
I don't remember too much discussion in that book about implementing it differently depending on whether a paper or electronic system is used. In a paper-based system, for example, a context hierarchy would be well thought out and an activity placed in one context because it wouldn't make sense to take time to physically manually re-write an activity description to put it into different folders. Also, in a paper-based system, priorities wouldn't need to be assigned if individual items were for example on indexed cards and could be rearranged.
I have read many of the articles from David Allen's website, and how he implements things using the Palm PDA seems to be evolving. How he would implement it on the PDA vs. paper would also probably have some differences.
So, when talking about how to implement GTD in Omni Focus, is "Pure GTD" something that really exists, or is there a lot of latitude for different GTD type programs to implement the details in different and innovative ways not specifically spelled out in the book?
I just get the impression that "Pure GTD" doesn't really exist in the strictest sense, and that when some people say that a concept isn't "pure" they don't realize that creativity and innovation in how GTD is implemented by any computer program are perfectly fine and can add a lot to the program's functionality and usefulness.
If David Allen himself were here, he might even request some of the features that some people consider "non pure GTD".
I think David Allen's website has a forum (for paying members). It would be interesting to hear his views on this.
Linear Mode
