[steve]

I'm curious to hear how people are using folders. Inspired by 7 habits, I have a folder for each of my "roles"— teacher, mentor, husband-dad, geek, artist etc. The method has some merit for weekly review and for making sure that all of my values and goals have some sort projects attached to them.

I love the built in flexibility of the folders (although, I would prefer tags and smartfolders!)

How are you using the folders?

[curt.clifton]

Originally Posted by steve

Inspired by 7 habits, I have a folder for each of my "roles"— teacher, mentor, husband-dad, geek, artist etc. The method has some merit for weekly review and for making sure that all of my values and goals have some sort projects attached to them.

I use folders in a similar way. I've converted each role into an actionable goal. For example "Computer Science Professor" becomes "Advance and propagate knowledge of computing". Under some of my top-level folders I have another level of folders for sub-goals, like "Help others understand software development" and "Earn tenure". I find these folders extremely helpful for monthly and annual reviews.

I have to resist the impulse to over-organize, but this amount of structure seems to work well for me. While I support the idea of tags and smart folders, I think I would still maintain my current hierarchy of roles and goals.

[LizPf]

I also use folders for roles, or for Uber-projects.

My current folders are:
Housewife
Shopping
T-Shirt Shop
House Remodel
Kids
Personal
Computer Admin (family Macintoshes)
SF Con (DH and I are Registration Chairs)
GT Con (I give a presentation every year)
Templates
Someday/Maybe

I have a couple other things that could be folders, but are top level "projects"* at the moment:

Friends
Knitting Design
Freecycle (I'm the local Moderator)

--Liz

* I use the word Project in quotes because I have few formal projects, and use this more as a sub-folder, a place to hold related actions, whether they are a linked project or not. We've discussed my heretical status elsewhere, but this works for me.

[dwayneneckles]

Curt,
Hi it's me Dwayne again.
What about goals categories such as health financial social.. is it an either or situation where u can organize your goals around roles or categories? If so then how do you, or anyone account for catergories such as health financial and social..

[colicoid]

I am also one of the proponents for sub projects but according to Omni this is really tricky to implement UI-wise. We had a good discussion about it in this thread:

http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthre...page=2&post=19

The suggestion here is to give more power to individual actions instead.

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

I try to use as little folders as possible because whenever you use strict categorization you will eventually run into problems of gray zones (one item might equally well belong in two categories).
Over-granularization of folders will get you into this kind of micro-management-hell-scenario quickly.

One thing I have noticed about myself, which is potentially dangerous, is the fact that it is very tempting to organize projects into folders (increase granularity). Later on when several projects have been completed I don't collapse folders to reduce complexity as needed. It is kind of like; I don't want to ruin my finely thought out structure.

How many projects do YOU need in a folder before your fingers start itching for cutting that folder up into sub folders?

I would love to forget more about the planning mode and live more inside context mode but it is simply not possible at work because everything here is so project-driven. Besides, if I'm going to show some tasks to someone that don't understand OF and GTD; I can really confuse them by switching between planning and context mode.

[MEP]

Originally Posted by steve

How are you using the folders?

I'm not. I haven't run into a situation yet where I really find it necessary. I suppose I could change my current project hierarchy (described in another thread), but doing so would create a lot of singletons with no bucket to collect them (in any sensible manner).

I've found that, for me at least, simply sticking to projects and action groups (sub-projects, whatever they are) is about perfect.

[Giorgio Valoti]

After joining the sneak peek program I used to to create a hierarchy of folders structured around several criteria. Nowadays I don’t use folders anymore: they’re too rigid. I just have a flat list of projects and I use the filters to show only the relevant informations.

By the way, I‘ve seen the same pattern with contexts. For example, I used to have the usual @WAITING FOR context. Now I just set a start date (say, next week) and I can “forget” about it until the given date; then I can review them and decide what to do: is it done? should I ask (again) what’s going on? etc…

[maverator]

I don't want to use folders, but I'm forced to since there is no concept of sub-projects in OmniFocus.

I would prefer to have one "top-level" project for each of the areas of concern that I have (e.g. work, exercise, etc.). Then I would have sub-projects for each particular thing I'm trying to Get Done. Many of them would be "singleton actions" but of course those things have a tendency to turn into bona fide projects. I would prefer that by adding sub-actions to any individual action, that would turn the parent action into a real project with all the power that comes with it.

Since you can't do that (yet??) I am forced to have a folder for each area of concern, containing a single singleton project and a variable number of actual projects. If an action morphs into a project I have to move it out of the singleton project.

This seems like a lot of work but I keep hoping that the "identity" of any "entity" in Omnifocus will eventually not depend on setting up the Project (or Library as it is now known) hierarchy in a certain way. I would like to have a project at x depth level without having to create folders, which to me seem to just add visual clutter.

I realize there are just as many preferences as there are users of this software, so take this as just my 2 cents about my particular preferences.

[MEP]

Originally Posted by maverator

I don't want to use folders, but I'm forced to since there is no concept of sub-projects in OmniFocus.

I would prefer to have one "top-level" project for each of the areas of concern that I have (e.g. work, exercise, etc.). Then I would have sub-projects for each particular thing I'm trying to Get Done. Many of them would be "singleton actions" but of course those things have a tendency to turn into bona fide projects. I would prefer that by adding sub-actions to any individual action, that would turn the parent action into a real project with all the power that comes with it.

Since you can't do that (yet??) I am forced to have a folder for each area of concern, containing a single singleton project and a variable number of actual projects. If an action morphs into a project I have to move it out of the singleton project.

I do that without any folders. Action groups are essentially sub-projects from a functional perspective. The UI is a bit wonky still, but the functionality is all there.

<edit> fixed my post which was horribly broken. nothing changed tho

[maverator]

Originally Posted by MEP

I do that without any folders. Action groups are essentially sub-projects from a functional perspective. The UI is a bit wonky still, but the functionality is all there.

As far as I can tell, and which I also gathered from other threads, action groups are not projects. Meaning that you can't have a Project (capital-P) with action groups in it and expect the action groups to behave like Projects themselves. You can't independently make an action group sequential if the parent project is parallel, you can't review them separately, and you can't set state independently. (I.e. the attributes in the Project Inspector apply to the parent project, not the action group.) Yes you can look at an action group and mentally consider it a project, but from a software functionality standpoint it isn't. But if I'm wrong and it's really wonky UI issues that give this illusion let me know.