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 mylifeorganized+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:mylifeorganized+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to mylifeorganized@googlegroups.com
<mailto:mylifeorganized@googlegroups.com>.
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/ac97c122-274b-4ef8-a6bc-d6e20d86bec2%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/ac97c122-274b-4ef8-a6bc-d6e20d86bec2%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
For more options, visit 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 mylifeorganized+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mylifeorganized@googlegroups.com.
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/56738010.9030401%40dwightarthur.us.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
