Hi Frank,

-- Message from Frank Niessink  (24.12.2009 22:45)
>  
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> 2009/12/23 Michael Jaeger <[email protected]
> <mailto:michael.jaeger%40in-flux.de>>:
> > Hi Frank,
> >
> > I am just wondering if the application model is a bit over-engineered.
> > For example, you can have a task with a note that has an attachment with
> > a note that has an attachment with a note ... and so on.  I am wondering
> > if anybody needs the possibility for such a deep structure and if there
> > is a mechanism to display it in an intuitive way to the user -- without
> > losing the overlook over everything.
>
> I guess if this is over-engineering it is accidental over-engineering.
> The notes that can be part of tasks and categories are the same as
> notes that are standalone. That's why they all have categories.
>
I understand, but is there an actual use case for this?  Don't get me
wrong, I am asking this because more features may make this tool more
complicated.  I do not know if you want to discuss this, but do you (as
a user) actually use/need the possibility for (unlimited) deep
hierarchical structures?  Maybe I just don't see the added value...

>
> > Moreover, is there some kind of
> > inheritance regarding the categories in this hierarchical structure?
>
> I'm not sure what you are asking here...
>
Sorry, I meant: If there is a task of category A and B and the task has
a note which is not explicitly assigned to a category, is the note then
categorizes in A and B?  And if so, what happens if the note is assigned
to category C, does it then belong to A, B and C or just to C?

All the best,
Michael.

Reply via email to