Maybe application area is the wrong way to frame the tenets? If we can say the tenets are the following workflows, then we should work on whatever application areas we need to in order to make the workflows complete. For example, if we wanted to make sharing data production level, then we have to do some identity work, which could later turn into contacts support, we would have to do some email to support sending out Notifications (pinging them about important changes to shares). If we wanted to be able to schedule meetings, that would mean calendar work, email work and free-busy work. If we want to have plausible task management, a little bit of email might be good, even if it's just to support sending and receiving tasks (not full-scale email client). The central tenet of Chandler is that without an integrated PIM, PIM workflows are inherently broken. Perhaps there are synergies to exploit where we can make progress on multiple fronts (functionality wise) without feeling like we're scattered across too many tenets. In other words, we can keep the workflow tenets small in number and focused, but still make signficant progress across the entire PIM.
|
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
