A quick update. Using contexts seems to work quite well. One problem you may be able to advise on. I ascribed the context "New none" to the Inbox, and all tasks I inbox in Windows automatically get this context, but on Android, whether I use the widget or the app to inbox intems, the context is not set, so I have to do it by editing. Is there an Android setting to make this automatic?
I have just made a query about these issues on Mark Forster's website at http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/21/the-final-version-perfected-fvp.html?postSubmitted=true¤tPage=3#comments On Saturday, December 19, 2015 at 4:23:28 PM UTC, Laurence Glazier wrote: > > Thanks Dwight I might choose the path of outline based views. For the > moment I have been tweaking the importance slider but I can see this may > get harder as time goes on! > > I tried a different approach today, by using the Active by Context view. > To move a task to the bottom of the list, I would set a context based on a > date stamp, e.g. 151219/1 etc, which effectively puts it to the bottom of > the list. In time, as these contexts become emptied, they would be deleted. > However the synchronisation from Windows to Android did not work well. > Tasks without contexts did not always show on the Android, but sometimes > did. By creating a new context and putting all items without a context into > it (called "New None") seemed to fix it. I may persevere with this idea for > a while. > > I need to understand this aspect of MLO better. Even if it does not solve > the immediate issue it is bound to help me in the future :) > > I might pose these questions, with a link to this thread, on a similar > forum on Mark Forster's website which I think may have a number of MLO > users. > > Laurence > > On Friday, December 18, 2015 at 3:40:20 AM UTC, Dwight Arthur wrote: >> >> 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 mylifeorganiz...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to mylifeo...@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?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/ac97c122-274b-4ef8-a6bc-d6e20d86bec2%40googlegroups.com >> . >> 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/1848643c-8c2a-4640-8d9e-1fc0124702b9%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
