> I have to say your use of Yojimbo as
> an everyday GTD tool is pretty impressive.
> Just the ambition to try and use it that
> way is impressive. I don’t really see that
> as the purpose of Yojimbo. (It’s really
> just considered an archival application.)
The purpose of Yojimbo doesn't encompas
> I read and re-read your post. I find
> your system impressive but very confusing
> to me.
Maybe I made things sound more complicated than they had to be by
giving too many details. Basically, whether I'm doing a GTD review or
I'm making plans for a particular project (which are two differen
> What would happen if the tag collection
> had several tags associated with it?
> Would you assign all of the available
> tags to an item dragged to that
> collection?
Absolutely. Why else would I be dragging it to that collection, if not
because I wanted it to appear in that collection?
--
> So, as a simple example, say you're moving homes.
I think you'd picked an example that doesn't really map well onto my
usual situation with a project, in two regards: First, more than half
of my projects are things where, once the project is completed, I
still want to have the notes easil
Sounds like you need OmniFocus.
I find it works perfectly with YJ - any detailed notes, saved
documents I have relating to a task in YJ can be linked to from OF by
pasting the item link as a note for the task making the two work
pretty seamlessly together.
T.
On 6 May 2008, at 13:26, [E
> You’re definitely not alone in your
> hesitance to use tags. David said
> this weekend that humans are spatial
> thinkers. Which is why stuffing things
> into an established hierarchy makes
> more sense than tags. While it’s true
> that - some - people are spatial
> thinkers, there are also peop
On 5/6/08 at 5:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(The reason David Allen recommends a simple A-to-Z filing system as
part of the GTD method, it seems to me, is less about ease of
retrieval and more about ease of filing.
For me, this is where Yojimbo excels. With the current model, I
don't need
