Sebastien Vauban <sva-news@...> writes: > rene wrote: > > > I find his code pretty close to what GTD should look like. There are a few > > things though that could be twicked a bit in order to comply with David > > Allen's new book on Getting Things Done. > > Can you detail them, for our own information, please?
Here are a few thoughts. Feel free to provide feedback and enhancements. Associating what GTD calls "Areas of Responsibility" to orgmode categories is great. But launching a search for these categories (areas of responsibility) has to be hardcoded in everyone's config file. It would be great if this could work like for Tags (C-a a M) or Todo keywords (C-a a T). Why not have a "C-a a R" which would prompt us for our own various Areas of Responsibility. Of course there is an org-agenda-filter-by-category function but this function should then work more as org-agenda-filter-by-tag where the category would either be selected with a fast selection letter or when you hit the TAB key you're being prompted for a list of possible categories. Within GTD, the way you are to choose which task to perform never relies on a preset priority level but on three limiting criteria, namely - your context: What can I do where I am? - your time available: How much time do I have? - your energy: How much energy do I have It's easy to implement your context as Tags: @home, @computer, @office, @internet, @errands, etc. It's therefore easy to extract/filter tasks pertaining to a particular context using "C-a a M". I find the org-effort-property misleading. It looks like you're talking about the energy criteria but in fact this deals with the estimated time duration of a task. Could one straighten this up? The estimated "task-duration" could then replace the misleading "org-effort" property. The "energy" level should work as the org-priority. "A" could mean the task will require from me a high level of priority, whereas "C" could mean a low level of priority. In David Allen's new book, which should be available early 2015, the three basic steps for the GTD method are: Capture, Clarify and Organize. In terms of vocabulary, he's not talking about a "task to refile" but rather an "action to clarify and organize", which in orgmode would consist in assigning the right: context (tag), duration, energy, project, where a project would pertain to a area of responsibility (category). For me this notion of projects (and sub-projects, sub-sub-projects, etc.) in org-mode is not that easy to deal with. Maybe I need to investigate things a bit more. Any idea would be welcome. Since the Weekly Review is such a key part in the GTD methodology, I don't think there's any real need to differentiate between active vs stuck projects. Every 7 to 10 days, you will go over your projects and thus identify the ones that need a next action to be defined. The ones that are considered as DONE, if all their sub-actions and sub projects are themselves done or canceled. -- rene
