Hi,
Chiming in on this thread with some dissenting opinion.
One thing really I find concerning with not reordering items is that
incoming items (through emails or server sync) will be inserted in a
list which is out of sort, so, potentially, new or modified items won't
show up where they should.
Of course, one could reorder all when these syncs happen (as Andre
proposes if I understood him correctly) but, since they happen in the
background at random time (from a user perspective at least, I've no
clear knowledge of when this is happening in general), the list will
have this weird feel of being sometimes stable after edits, sometimes
not. Also, it gives local edits a different status than remote edits
(who come up through sync). That's problematic.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
- Philippe
Andre Mueninghoff wrote:
Though I'm not annoyed particularly by the automatic re-ordering in
response to edits, I think it is unhelpful much more often than helpful.
I find the automatic re-ordering somewhat useful when I have sorted on a
particular column, for example, and am making similar changes in that
field for several items, as the changed items "disappear" to their new
location in the table, there is a sense of completion of sorts. The
downside being that if I have further edits or want to verify my edits
for some of these items that have jumped automatically to a new
location, I have to go find them.
I have a proposal. What if the Triage button on the toolbar became in
essence the "refresh the sort order" button for all columns displayed in
a table. That is, there would be no automatic re-ordering of items in
the table in response to user edits. Edits to items in any field
displayed in the table (including kind stamps) would be used to sort the
items when the Triage toolbar button is pressed. Automatic reordering
triggered by alarms firing, inbound changes to items, etc. would be
unaffected. Behavior produced by clicking on the triage status column
header would be unchanged.
My personal new item triage workflow frequently includes making several
different edits to each item in addition to changing its triage status.
I think this proposal would address Dan's issues, and Keith's usage.
What do you think? What am I missing?
Cheers, Andre
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:05:34 +0000, "Keith Winsor"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dan Steinicke wrote:
I think this also ties in to the end user confusion around the
"Triage" button. I have always thought it would be much more
intuitive to just have the triage column header button do what the
"Triage" button now does. In my understanding the main function of
the "Triage" button is to prevent row reordering when you change the
triage state. If rows only re-ordered when the headers were clicked
then it would seem we would be able to simplify this work flow as
well. Are there users out there who like the automatic
re-ordering in response to edits? Are there users out there who are
annoyed by the dashboard re-ordering in response to edits?
Dan _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Dan,
I agree re automatic sorting making it confusing to keep track of items.
I'm not so sure about 'simplifying' the Triage button. I've noticed
(i.e. this method of usage has crept up on me and your post has made me
realise how I do it!) that I tend to make triage decisions in the Now
section on a screenful of items at a time, then triage to dispose of the
Dones and Laters I've just marked, before dealing with the next batch. I
guess it gives me my instant gratification in more manageable chunks! It
occurs to me that if someone has amended a shared Later event (which
pops into Now as a result) that by doing this I might miss the event
unless it shows up on the first page of Nows, and triage it unseen back
to Later, so maybe I should just change my usage pattern, in which case
using headers would be a viable solution. But I think the triage button
is a bit of a USP of Chandler and genuinely gives you that 'I've
achieved all of this' feeling, where clicking on a column header
doesn't. So objectively I agree but subjectively I disagree!
Any other users out there with odd Chandler habits?
Keith
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
