Reading parts of Daniel's response caused me wonder if there aren't parallels between some of the structural aspects of naming Tasks (or Activities) and defining them, and the way plugin developers have agreed to use standard, defined Slices to provide a consistent user Documentation experience. I also think that some of the work Eric has done with customized View templates, invoked by simply applying a defined Tag value could be useful in structuring a 'common' structure. If these 'core' elements are implemented properly, then individual needs could be integrated relatively simply by taking advantage of Transclusion.
In effect, I think spending some time getting the initial "built in structures" right, would be a good investment. Finally, I really like the idea of distributed sub-plans that could be integrated via p2p technologies. Alternatively ( at the very least ), it would be good to use ReeFeed items to automatically collect 'updates', rather than always having to chase after them. My experience with with Project Management in 'enterprise-class' organizations leads me to believe that it will be difficult to get the design of such a system right without quite a bit of evolutionary tinkering, so I would assume that this needs a fair bit of elapsed time, and the engagement, or at least advice, of several of the more proficient developers that are part of the TW community. Done correctly, it could be a rewarding project. After all, Microsoft Project "seats" are purchased by the 100s in large organizations and, even discounted for volume, generally cost more than $500 each. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/qvbQ9BYrfkUJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
