Am 06.08.2015 um 18:00 schrieb Dwight Arthur: > Hi, Christoph. The UserVoice item to which you refer involves adding > another option to computed score. I would like you to know that > computed score is already the single most complex configuration I > have ever tried to tune and I have tuned some heavy stuff in my life. > Adding yet another parameter is unlikely to make it any easier to > understand. Before I would consider supporting a request to add > another parameter I would want to know whether you had even tried to > achieve what you want by adjusting the existing parameters, what you > had tried, and how it had worked. Like Pottster, I hardly use this so > I cannot give a lot of specific advice but I'm guessingthat a close > reading of the relevant section of the user manual would be helpful.
Dwight, I have already read the detailed docs about the computed-score priority and I understand how it works.
It looks pretty complex, but it is not so complex actually. The only relevant part for our issue is the section "Factoring Dates into the Urgency Calculation". That section is written with several case distinctions, which makes it overly complex to read. In reality, no case distinction would be necessary if the author had just written "we treat unset start and due dates as the current date".
The date contribution as a function of time is then simply a linear function (like shown here: http://www.jleemack.com/uploads/6/7/9/7/6797819/4025486.jpg). If you switch on "overdue boost", then the negative part of the function is quadratic instead of linear.
The only things you can tweak are whether you want that overdue boost (yes or no) and the weight factors, i.e. the slope of the linear function. However, you cannot change how unset dates are treated (namely as "current date") - and that is in practice a much more important option than changing the slope of the function.
Your understanding that tasks with no due date should be considered "due today" is not very intuitive for me. If I set not due date, then the task simply has no due date, i.e. can be done any time, even a year later. So a task that is due next week should have a higher priority, not a lower one, as it is right now.
Mathematically speaking, "start date" and "due date" are the lower and upper limits of an interval (for the time when it's feasible to act on the task). If there is no start date, then normally this means that there is no lower limit (or lower limit = -infinity), if there is no due date, then there is no upper limit (or upper limit = +infinity).
My suggestion to fix this would be to change the mathematical function for the date score contributions so that it does not work linearly over the time as x-axis but flattens out and has an asymptotic lower and upper limit when going to infinity (like this: http://intmstat.com/analytic-trigonometry/arctanx.gif); the lower limit should be used for unset start dates, the upper limit for unset due dates.
There should also be an option to have unset start and due dates interpreted as "today", for people who think the current behavior is more reasonable. But still I think this is not the obvious choice for the option and therefore should not be the default.
-- Christoph -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/55C39C39.20000%40online.de. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
