Same Task in Two Locations

[jded]

I like to use folders to logically group similar tasks. For example
"Saturday Routines" or "Financial Planning". Very often I would like
the same task to show up in two places. For example, I would like the
"Balance Checkbook" task to show up in both the Saturday Routines and
Financial Planning folders, but still be the same (single) task. Is
there a way to do this?

If not, I have a suggestion for a future feature to do this. I use
another tool (Ultra Recall) that uses something it calls "Logical
Linking" whereby the same data element can show up in many different
places as a simple clickable link back to the original item. The
analagy would be a link task in the Saturday Routines folder that
points back to the Balance Checkbook task in the Financial Planning
folder.

Thanks in advance.

[pottster]

I do this by placing a task link in the task notes - right click in
notes or Control+Alt+T.
I put a link in each task to reference the other.

[Fletcher]

This is a challenge for any single-dimension hierarchical structure,
naturally.

The key is to create a folder structure that best serves the geography
of dealing with the outline (that is, however you can most-logically
find what you need in the outline, use a folder structure for that).

Since MLO supports unlimited "Contexts" and contexts can be nested
(contexts can contain other contexts), you can create an arbitrary
number of other contextual structures.

You can create a context called @daily_tasks that contains
@daily_Saturday, then assign Balance Checkbook to the @daily_Saturday
context.
Additionally, you can create a context of @planning that contains
@plan_Financial, then assign the @plan_Financial context to Balance
Checkbook also.

When search for either context, that same single task will show up.

You don't have to use nested contexts-- that's made my example
slightly more complex, but it is the next logical question-- you can
identify all of your planning-related tasks by looking at everything
in any of the contexts that are under @planning, for example.
Likewise, you can see all the things that you have to do routinely by
looking at the @daily_tasks context.

It won't be exactly what you're looking for, visually, but it is
enough of the solution to not have to create imposter tasks or links
around your tree.

[vikram.sjn]

I too have been looking for the same functionality.

Contexts approach works, but it is not same as having same task/item
appear under multiple nodes in the tree.

Placing link in notes - is also a workaround.

It will be much better if this 'cloning' functionality is provided in
the MLO.

Years ago when I was trying outline editors - I noticed this feature
was there in Leo (literate programming editor). Recently noticed that
this same feature is also available in another outline editor (which
also allows adding tasks in the outline) named MyInfo.

If Andrey is reading this, I have been wanting this (and am sure many
more want this) feature for quite some time... and to workaround with
Contexts of Link in notes is nagging. A clean, natural and obvious
implementation will is desired.

[jded]

Thanks to all for the comments.

1) I don't like the linking in Notes implementation. It seems to me
that it forces you to create dummy tasks that contain no other
function than to carry the link in the Notes. I see that as potentail
clutter.
2) The multiple Context approach is certainly doable. I don't find
it particulalry visual, but coupled with the right filters it does
give the desired functionality.

I think the "logical linking" approach would/could still have a lot of
merit. I found it to make things easier for my to visualise why a
task is in a given spot. Also, as implemented in UR, it doesn't jump
you "back" to the linked task (as in the Notes implementation); you
have the "feeling" of editting the task in place even though you are
working "via" the logical link.

Just my 2p worth.

JDED

> > > Thanks in advance.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[pottster]

I think you have to remember that you are using an Outliner. This way
of structuring data has inherent advantages and disadvantages. You
cannot make it into something it isn't.

If your data needs to be less hierarchical and more relational and
visual you might be better off with something like PersonalBrain.

[chuckdevee]

I agree with Fletcher that this is a big challenge for a single-
dimensional hierarchical structure.
By way of background, my major Outline branches are categorised by
different areas such as 'Financial Planning', 'Fitness and Health',
'work' etc.. and I colour code all the tasks in these main branches so
that it identifies them better in the To-Do lists.
However, there are some tasks I have which are dated for the distant
future (reminders to service a boiler for example, or review insurance
arrangements). I don't like these cluttering my my Outline and put
them in a separate branch "Dated To-Dos in the Distant Future". The
problem is that this category doesn't fit with the same criteria as
the others as it is defined simply by time - similar to your "Saturday
Routines" category.

So my suggested solution would be the following.
To have functionality to:-
1) hide branches from the Outline (in the same way that you can hide
branches from the To-Do views) and
2) to be able to save specific Outline views.

In this way, you could for example, create a Saturday Routines sub-
folder in each of your main branches so that each Saturday Routine
task is still associated with its relevant area of focus. And you
could create, save, and recall an Outline View that shows only your
top-level Folders and the Saturday Routines subfolders in each. You
would also be able to create views which hide all Saturday Routine
branches from the Outline if you dodn't want them to clutter up your
overall outline. The Saved Outline views could be recalled in the same
way that ToDo views are currently recalled.

This solution seems to me to be consistent with the way MLO currently
works. Would welcome your thoughts.

[jded]

Like you, I too have a seperate folder/area for "dated stuff";
birthdays, anniversaries etc. This is straightforward and de-clutters
things considerably.

I follow what you describe below and is probably where I will end up
given current MLO funtionality. The filters/views are powerful tools.

I continue to think that the "logical linking" approach would suit me
the most (it certainly helps that I use that feature a lot in UR) -
tasks show up cleanly and clearly in the tree exactly where I want
them to be. I don't really think it changes the dimensionality of the
system any - it really is nothing more than the extension of the link
in the Notes field idea to a linked item in the tree. The key featute
is that one would edit the underlying task at the location of the link
and not jump back to the underlying task (as one does when one puts a
link in the Notes field).

[robisme]

plus, it would allow to make a task belonging to several projects, as it is often the case.

eg. I have to make identity photos in order to:

1)ask for a new passport

2)subscribe to the Library

this is 2 distinct projects. Which one deserve the "photo todo" most ?

(at the risk of going twice to the photo-shop, which is lack of efficiency isn't it ?)

[daniel sekera]

couldn't you just have one folder and use contexts and then view your to-do list by a specific context?

In my big mass collect folder I would have all my tasks that relate to financial planning for instance have a context called financial

then when i have time to look at my financial to-do's I simply click on the financial context in my to-do view and all my "active" financal related tasks are now there waiting to be done.

sure the "outline" may look big and cumbersome with all the tasks randomly displayed where ever they went in at but who cares because when i use the to do view I can look at just what I want.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mylifeorganized/-/cnzmqwaLTKcJ.
To post to this group, send email to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mylifeorganiz...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en.

[Dwight]

I would handle your photo task by creating a "get photo" task in my "errands" folder away from both projects, and then for each project, finding the task that comes after getting the photo and adding a dependency on the photo task.

robisme <robillar...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Brad Konia]

I agree with the previous postings requesting logical linking functionality within MLO. I've also used Ultra Recall and I find their logical linking implementation to be nearly perfect, as well as extremely simple.

This feature would not require any changes to the hierarchical structure, nor would it introduce any added complexity. You would simply be creating aliases or pointers to specific branches in the hierarchy, at other locations in the hierarchy. This would be analogous to a symbolic link within a Linux file system, which is also hierarchical.

Implementing this functionality would make it much easier to create task hierarchies without having to stress over where to place each task, when it could logically be placed in more than one location within the hierarchy.

I realize you can get much of this functionality using contexts. The problem is, the MLO user interface is designed primarily around the task hierarchy, not contexts. I tried using a flat task list and organizing everything by context and it didn't work out. The context editor allows you to include contexts within other contexts, but there's no way to build an inclusion hierarchy. It just allows you to enter a list if contexts that are included within another context. Additionally, when you add a new task, the context selector displays every context you've created in one long list, rather than allowing you to select contexts hierarchically. If you try to use contexts as your primary organizational strategy within MLO, you'll end up with a big mess that will ultimately be too cumbersome to use efficiently.

[robisme (Olivier R)]

Brad, I completly agree with your entire post.

[ssintay]

I just wanted to add my vote for this capability to be added in the future.

[Dwight Arthur]

Hi, Stephen. I just wanted to point out that nobody tracks how many comments in this forum say that they are voting for some enhancement.  If you want to vote and have it count you should use
http://mlo.uservoice.com
-Dwight
Mlo betazoid on Android sgn2

[robisme (Olivier R)]

Dwight,

Is there someone in charge of gather similar requests?

I mean, very often, there are request that are formulated differently but are, indeed, the same need. (It can be an old request).

The problem is that it underestimates the number of votes.

For this reason, I don't use the MLO voic anymore.

Olivier

[Dwight Arthur]

Hi, Olivier. It is true that there are a number of unresolved issues with UserVoice and the one you cite is an important one. There is nobody in charge of consolidating requests. I for one would not want that job because in some cases the requests are similar but have areas of difference over which people disagree. The best suggestion is to use the comments area for each request to ask potential voters to support one or the other of the proposals in order to have more impact. This is not a great solution but I have seen it work.

 

I should mention that I have definitely seen MLO development priorities be influenced by uservoice voting in some cases. I am pretty sure that supportive comments to forum posts have little to no chance of affecting developer priorities. For the record, there is another channel named JIRA that seems even more effective but access is limited to users who have volunteered and been accepted to the beta testing program.

-Dwight

--

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 http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/f2dae4e0-0265-414e-9a52-abad4693bbca%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[robisme (Olivier R)]

Thank you for this information.

For my part however, There are some features I had requested on this google groups that have been released. (eg : new smart-filter ctrl+L, auto-jump to first tab if double click a task, ability to see the tasks linked to one task...)

I didn't put those requests on the user voice, but here, so I think they also look at this forum, don't they ?

Perhaps the uservoice shoud have tags or even #tags ?

Olivier

[Dwight Arthur]

Hi, Olivier.

Based on a couple of years of watching the forums here is what I have concluded:

 

MLO staff read many but not all new posts (as opposed to comments on existing posts).

 

If they see a new post and it’s a bug report they will respond with support (but sending bug reports to the support email address is a little more likely to get a response)

 

If they see a new post and it describes an enhancement that they find appealing, likely to increase user satisfaction and/or revenue, not likely to be hated by very many users, easy to understand, not that expensive to build and consistent with the founder’s vision of how the product may evolve, they may engage with the request. Once this happens there’s a good chance that the MLO staff will engage with the discussion around the suggestion. Olivier, you have pulled this off several times.

 

If there is a post with a slightly less appealing enhancement request (eg popular but controversial) I believe that there’s a good chance that they will notice it but a lesser chance that they will engage with the discussion. In almost all cases (except the rare post that draws MLO staff into the discussion) I believe that MLO staff are highly unlikely to notice the comments and comments offering “+1” or “metoo” have little influence on the future of the app. As I have mentioned previously I think that uservoice requests that make it to the top ten, or the first page or whatever get serious consideration. MLO staff may not be implementing it but they will at least figure out why not, and might tell you if you ask. I say this fully aware that uservoice tends to promote old requests above new ones, that people who post suggestions without checking for similar existing recommendations split the vote and reduce the idea’s chances, and that there is no active curator combining similar requests or removing ones whose time has passed.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/a612a203-4d69-464d-88ed-5ade943ee614%40googlegroups.com.