On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 19:15 +0000, bsag wrote: [snip]
> Like Reinier, I think the icons for contexts are quite nice, but it implies > that there are hard-coded contexts, which I also don't like much. I think > that > most people probably have a different set of contexts that work for them, > so I'd rather let people name their own. You could solve this by making the user choose an icon when creating a context. You could let the user pick out an icon from a list of standard icons. I don't think it should be a replacement for the textual name of a context, rather an addition to the name... > > I also sympathise with John's view of hosted web applications - I think it's > nice to have a choice. > > The starring looks pretty cool, but again, it depends how it's implemented, > and it would be nice to have a choice about whether to use that or not. I'm > hoping that tags might fulfil this role in Tracks in a very freeform way: > you can tag an action as 'nextaction' (or whatever), then view a page just > showing things you've tagged nextaction. > I always thought of a star as a sort of tag. You can attach it to any action and the meaning of it is not imposed by the system. You can use it for nextactions that have higher priority or just to distinguish the hard nextactions from the easy nextactions (low hanging fruit in consultant terms :-) ) (Which also makes me think that perhaps the ability to use an icon as a tag could be handy e.g. icon for nextaction or icon for private / work-related actions. This could prevent cluttering the screen with tags) Reinier _______________________________________________ Tracks-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss
