[jakeg]

Thanks to Omni I'm testing omnifocus and I like it so far. However, I can't find a way to incorporate single tasks. I was hoping omni would provide some means, but they haven't. Some tasks simply don't fit into a project mode. I find myself creating projects for tasks that don't need one and that simply complicate things.

So if anyone else has a solution how to deal with single tasks I'd love to hear what you came up with. Thanks.

[sprocketjockey]

I've created a project called Single Step Tasks, and set it to parallel tasks.

Set the filter to Available, and you should be able to have a place to put all those single steppers

[chrjohns]

I had the same thought when I reviewed Ethan's first screen cast. Although I haven't used the actual app yet, I am having a philosophical issue with the way it is set up. IMHO single actions just don't belong grouped together as a project because they are by their nature unrelated. They should start in the inbox and then move out of the inbox to a context list when a context is assigned to them. The user should not be required to assign the actions to a project to move them out of the inbox.

[michelle]

This is something we have been thinking and talking about a lot. We are working on a long term solution, but for now the best thing to do is make a project for single tasks. We welcome any suggestions or feedback you have on this.

[brianogilvie]

Originally Posted by jakeg

So if anyone else has a solution how to deal with single tasks I'd love to hear what you came up with. Thanks.

I have a project called "Stay Organized," where I put unrelated tasks. I suppose it might better be called "Keep Head above Water"!

In terms of the interface, though, would it be possible to define a special project, whatever it's called, in which every action was a next action? Because the main problem with creating a "Single Tasks" project is that only the first one shows up in a context list as a next action, when in fact they are all, by their nature, next actions.

[michelle]

Originally Posted by brianogilvie

In terms of the interface, though, would it be possible to define a special project, whatever it's called, in which every action was a next action?

Interesting . . . we were thinking of creating a special type of project for single tasks that had no next actions. You're idea may be better. Do others agree? Should they all be next actions?

[HiramNetherlands]

Originally Posted by michelle

Interesting . . . we were thinking of creating a special type of project for single tasks that had no next actions. You're idea may be better. Do others agree? Should they all be next actions?

Yes, that would make sense. Alternatively, the special single-tasks-collection could display the first n tasks (hand-ordered by user) as first actions, with n being a user defined number.

[Craig]

I'm still having a hard time trying to understand how distinguishing "next actions" in ANY parallel project makes any sense...

[HiramNetherlands]

Originally Posted by Craig

I'm still having a hard time trying to understand how distinguishing "next actions" in ANY parallel project makes any sense...

You hand-order the tasks. Or you don't, if you don't care which actions comes up as the next action.

[jelmore]

Originally Posted by Craig

I'm still having a hard time trying to understand how distinguishing "next actions" in ANY parallel project makes any sense...

You beat me to it.

It seems that having all actions in a parallel project be Next Actions would make it easy to have a parallel project named "Runway" or "Single Actions" or "Next Actions" highlight everything.

(The whole idea of a "parallel project" seems not very GTD-ish to me. But at the same time, OmniFocus doesn't have to adhere strictly to GTD, so long as it's possible to do so by choice.)