Hi,
I'm of a different point of view on the use of collections. I
decided to
totally embrace the fact that collections are not disjoint sets (one
element can be in several) and I therefore use them more as
"tags" (or
"play lists") and create them very liberally. Currently, I'm using 17
collections and I'm refraining to create more only because of some UI
oddities, chiefly among them, the fact I can't reorder them at
will. But
that aside...
*Theory*
I think there is a very strong incentive to use one single vanilla
mechanism to group elements instead of creating a bunch of categories
(clusters, collections, tags, labels, etc...) with similar but
different
properties. For the same reason we believed there shouldn't be
different
kind of items ("no silo"), one shouldn't invent different kind of
sets.
So, humor me a little here and make that claim: the collection is the
only single grouping mechanism we really need.
*UI*
Of course, we need a *better* UI than the one we have today so
that we
can indeed make use of gazillions of collections (or call them
tags, or
labels, or clusters...). So here's a short list a incremental UI
improvements that'd go a long way (in order of priority):
- allow collection to be "hidden" from the sidebar: one should have a
list of all user defined collections in the collection menu (or,
better,
a specialized view if we have gazillions of them...) and be able to
check them or not to make them viewable in the side bar. If I had
that
feature today, I could reduce my list of 17 collections to 5 (the
one I
consult everyday) and pop into view the one I need only rarely when I
need them. Also, in the mind of the user, this create a neat
equivalence
between tag (hidden collection) and folder (viewed collection),
although, internally, there's no real difference and one can
become the
other at will.
- allow the "Appears in" widget to be editable: that's one of my pet
peeve but, really, it's frustrating to have that list there and not
being able to edit it, particularly when you want simply to
"remove" the
item from a collection. This would make tagging easier also:
simply add
the tag there.
- allow collections/tags to be created "on the fly" in the quick
entry
field: additionally to editing the appears in, one should be able to
type "/tag foo" and have all the selected items dropped into said foo
collection. If that collection/tag doesn't exist, just create it.
Infinitely faster than drag and drop (the only way we have today
to move
items). Also, imagine the power of that scenario: type "/find foo",
select all the results, type "/tag foo" and you created a
collection of
all your foo items reusable any time.
- allow computed collections to be defined in the quick entry:
cheery on
the cake, one should be able to create a computed collection using
logic. e.g. type "/collection stuff = foo AND bar" and you create a
collection that's the union of those 2 sets. Note that we have that
logic in the repo today. It's a very geeky feature (so last in my
prio
order :) ) but incredibly powerful.
Well, ok, that last point is may be too much. But I think the first 3
ones would go a long way to address the clustering items issue
pointed
to by Poojan initially.
Cheers,
- Philippe
Mimi Yin wrote:
Hi Poojan,
This is a good, but hard question to answer. I know there are other
GTD practitioners on the list, so please pipe up with your own
experiences!
In my experience, Chandler Collections are too heavyweight for GTD
projects, which are intended to be bite-size and are therefore too
numerous to really fit in the sidebar.
The short answer is that Chandler's version of GTD 'projects' is:
1. Create an item for the project and mark it as a Task.
2. Jot down next actions and related thoughts in the Notes field of
the Task item.
3. Cycle the Task item between NOW and LATER as your make
progress on
the project.
I even go so far as to track Done and Un-Done 'sub-tasks' in the
Notes
field.
This is clearly a hack. But one thing to note is that David Allen
himself advises people *against* spelling out the list of sub-tasks.
Just write down the Next Action.
Nevertheless, as sub-tasks emerge from projects, there's no question
that there's a real need to be able to group and order items
together
into "something more than an item, but less than a collection". In
past design discussions, we've called this grouping a *cluster*.
It's
something akin to an email thread, but more flexible in that
clusters
are *not* limited to just email, members of the cluster can be
members
of multiple clusters, and users should be able to add/remove items
from a cluster.
You can read more about clusters under "Lightweight Organization,
aka
Project Management, aka Clusters" on this page:
http://chandlerproject.org/Product/
ProcessingInformationTriageDashboardClusters
Re:
Once I do item #1 I want item #2 to appear on my "Now" list. Is
this
function possible?
I'm not sure there is a 1:1 mapping between Triage Status (NOW,
LATER,
DONE) and whether a task is blocked versus not blocked. Meaning,
just
because #1 is DONE and #2 is up-next, doesn't necessarily mean
NOW is
a good time to address #2.
For example, if I have a GTD project around attending a wedding
scheduled for 6 months from Today. I may need to send in the RSVP
for
the wedding next week, but don't really need to or want to worry
about
the wedding gift for another 4-5 months. (Actually, isn't the
acceptable timeframe for wedding gifts, up-to-1 year after the
wedding?)
Another thought is that sub-tasks aren't always linear. In fact,
more
often than not, they aren't. If you're at the bank, but haven't made
the call to schedule a time with the mechanic, you might go ahead
and
transfer the money anyway, just because then it'd be done and you
wouldn't have to worry about it. Arrange drop-off and pick-up
might or
might not be the same person, depending on the kindness and
availability of your friends ;)
Anyhow, the long and short of it is, Today, there is a way to model
GTD projects as individual Task items in Chandler today. Longer
term,
we're looking at Clusters as a way to flesh out the project tracking
workflows you're describing.
Anybody else have personal experiences that might lend some
insight on
this topic?
Mimi
On Nov 17, 2007, at 1:36 PM, Poojan Wagh wrote:
Hi, Users.
I was wondering how things in GTD map to Chandler, and I was
wondering
if any of the other users have a workflow in Chandler that seems
to work
well. I have a few specific questions about how Chandler works
with the
typical GTD scheme.
For example, let's suppose I create a project "Get car fixed" in
Chandler (as a collection). I then have the following actions:
1. Call
mechanic for an estimate & appointment 2. Transfer cash to checking
account 3. Arrange for a drop-off ride 4. Arrange for a pick up
ride
Is there an easy way in Chandler to designate one of these
actionable,
and defer the others? Once I do item #1 I want item #2 to appear
on my
"Now" list. Is this function possible? Is this capability
planned? Can I
do it without looking through all my deferred actions and re-
assigning
an order?
I have more questions, but I will save them for later.
--
Poojan
_______________________________________________
chandler-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-users
_______________________________________________
chandler-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-users
_______________________________________________
chandler-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-users
