I have since discovered the link I gave sees no action. All the
discussion appears to be
here: http://markforster.squarespace.com/fv-forum/ - as I expected
would happen, Mark Forster is already trying to improve on his FVP,
"Final Version Perfected".
Laurence
On Saturday, December 19, 2015 at 11:43:26 PM UTC, Laurence Glazier
wrote:
A quick update. Using contexts seems to work quite well. One
problem you may be able to advise on. I ascribed the context "New
none" to the Inbox, and all tasks I inbox in Windows automatically
get this context, but on Android, whether I use the widget or the
app to inbox intems, the context is not set, so I have to do it by
editing. Is there an Android setting to make this automatic?
I have just made a query about these issues on Mark Forster's
website at
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/21/the-final-version-perfected-fvp.html?postSubmitted=true¤tPage=3#comments
<http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/21/the-final-version-perfected-fvp.html?postSubmitted=true¤tPage=3#comments>
On Saturday, December 19, 2015 at 4:23:28 PM UTC, Laurence Glazier
wrote:
Thanks Dwight I might choose the path of outline based views.
For the moment I have been tweaking the importance slider but
I can see this may get harder as time goes on!
I tried a different approach today, by using the Active by
Context view. To move a task to the bottom of the list, I
would set a context based on a date stamp, e.g. 151219/1 etc,
which effectively puts it to the bottom of the list. In time,
as these contexts become emptied, they would be deleted.
However the synchronisation from Windows to Android did not
work well. Tasks without contexts did not always show on the
Android, but sometimes did. By creating a new context and
putting all items without a context into it (called "New
None") seemed to fix it. I may persevere with this idea for a
while.
I need to understand this aspect of MLO better. Even if it
does not solve the immediate issue it is bound to help me in
the future :)
I might pose these questions, with a link to this thread, on a
similar forum on Mark Forster's website which I think may have
a number of MLO users.
Laurence
On Friday, December 18, 2015 at 3:40:20 AM UTC, Dwight Arthur
wrote:
You mention an important point. In a to-do list view, the
included tasks are shown in a flat list either ordered
according to a defined set of sort rules or else ordered
according to a manual sort.
Outline views in contrast show the included tasks in a
hierarchical list. Most of the time, the entire view is
ordered according to the order the tasks are in within the
underlying profile. If you specify a sort rule in a
hierarchical view, it will be used to sort the top level
items; tasks in the branch below each top level item are
unsorted, that is they are in the order of the underlying
profile outline. So if you re-order tasks within a folder,
you are actually reorganizing the underlying outline, and
these changes will be synched.
You can build custom hierarchical views that zoom in to a
particular branch, or that exclude any item whose contexts
are all closed, or limit the display to active tasks (ie
not hidden, no future start date, etc). Maybe something
like this would serve you better.
-Dwight
MLO Betazoid on Windows, Cloud and Android SGN2
On 12/17/2015 5:44 PM, Laurence Glazier wrote:
Thanks Dwight
I will try something like that for the time being, and
see how well it works for me. I can revert to using
Active Starred view, and starring every task, which works
though does not make the application shine!
If there is a solution we have both overlooked, I suspect
it is in outline based views rather than to-do list ones.
It may be that synchronizing other manually ordered views
will be needed to solve this one. And by then Mark
Forster may well have come up with new refinements to his
methods!
Laurence
On Thursday, December 17, 2015 at 5:38:44 PM UTC, Dwight
Arthur wrote:
Thanks for the link to FVP, it was an interesting
read. I had been going to suggest something about
using dependencies to form tasks into a chain but its
clear that this would not help manage FVP.
If I wanted to do this: I would use Importance. I
would start by multiselecting all of the tasks in a
chain and setting importance to zero. Then, whenever
I want to put an FVP "dot" on a task I would up the
importance by one
- <alt>2, <alt>2, tab, right-arrow
- if <general> section in task properties is
collapsed, only one <alt>tab is needed
The next task I wanted to dot, I would set importance
to two. Same hotkey sequence except two taps on the
right-arrow key.
somewhere around ten I would stop counting taps and
just hold down the right arrow key until importance
gets into the neighborhood, then use right arrow or
left arrow to fine-tune it.
If the last task I dotted got importance 27 and I
need to add a new task, I would add it with
importance 28 and the next task dotted would be 29.
I would work from a view that zoomed to a particular
folder and displayed tasks sorted in order on
ascending importance. Each folder has its own
sequence of importance values and you have to
remember the current value so that you can assign a
value one higher to the next dotted or added task.
Do you want to use FVP to select which task to do
next across multiple folders? If so then the view
should include all of the candidate folders and they
should share a single sequence of importance values
drawbacks of this method:
1. you need to use your own memory to track the next
importance value for each chain. That, or else
check the bottom of the view every time.
2. If you use the contents of different folders
together in varying combinations you will need to
assign a single string of importance numbers
across folders
3. I suppose that every once in a while the rankings
get stale and the piece of paper gets messy and
you start over with a fresh sheet, right? The
equivalent of this would be setting importance
for all tasks back to zero. If you have more than
200 dotted or new tasks between resets you will
run out of importance values. In that case I
would set urgency for all affected tasks to zero
at the reset as well, and after assigning
importance number 200 to some task the next task
would get urgency 1 and importance one, then
urgency one and importance two and so on up
to urgency one and importance two hundred, then
urgency two and importance one and so on. By the
time you get to urgency 200 and importance 200
you will have dotted 40,000 tasks which I think
would be more than enough. Your view would then
be sorted by urgency ascending and then
importance ascending, next task at the bottom.
This allows you longer lists but it's more
complex and more to remember
4. Mobile: the lists and views will synch well and
display well, but it could be terribly difficult
on Android (and, I assume, iPhone) to assign an
importance value of 7 (not 6 or 8) to a task.
There's a slider that could be used but you would
need a stylus to make fine-tuning adjustments and
there's no confirmation of what number the slider
is set to. So in my opinion you would need to
analyze your queue and decide what you want to
work on, on Windows and you could use mobile
platforms to tick off completed tasks, capture
new tasks, and have a peek at what's pending.
5. when a view gets longer than what fits on one
page I could have trouble doing this. But I guess
that drawback applies when doing it on paper as well.
On Thursday, December 17, 2015 at 2:59:57 AM UTC-5,
Laurence Glazier wrote:
Sounds intriguing!
As I understand it, each successive activity in
the chain is more desirable (or less undesirable)
than the preceding one. The last one in the chain
is always the preferred one from the entire list.
You work on that one. If you leave it unfinished,
you remove it from the chain
(unflag/unstar/unmark it somehow) and transfer it
to the bottom of the list.
The next one to work with is what was the
previous one in the chain, unless the chain can
be extended further down again with more
desirable ones.
If and when you get back to the top item, when
that has been worked on you start a new chain
again from the top.
It takes a bit of getting used to.
--
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
https://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized
<https://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/ac97c122-274b-4ef8-a6bc-d6e20d86bec2%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/ac97c122-274b-4ef8-a6bc-d6e20d86bec2%40googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/184c1934-3e35-497d-a64a-4003bd328f59%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/184c1934-3e35-497d-a64a-4003bd328f59%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
