You can do a global find and replace.
Click on Projects so that the entire database shows up. The hit Command-F to bring up the Find box. Enter the Tag you want to change in the Find field, and then the new Tag that replaces it in the Replace field. One step, they all change.
Not as clean as if tag management were baked into the app, but it works well enough for me.
Do you really get this example (from your old post) to work? When I try it, the search only finds tasks where Alan and David are written next to each other (which is what I would expect), not if there are other names between them. And for some reason it only works without slashes in front of the names.
Yes, it still works for me.
After reading your post I tried another experiment in which one item had the tags /alan and /betty (in that order).
Searching for â/alan /bettyâ was successful, and so was âbetty /alanâ even though the order was different from the item.
Not sure why itâs not wiring for you. Are you using OF Pro?
Ah - now I get it! I used the Search window (cmd-F), following your instruction, but as that explicitly states, it finds strings. When I used the search field in the toolbar instead, Omnifocus searches for the words separately, and my results become the same as yours. A great work-around till we get built-in tags! Thanks!
Old comment but I canât help myselfâŚI highly recommend investing in TextExpander, sure, it can help with tags, but if take the time to build a repository of âsnippetsâ and learn how to use them $39 (or whatever it costs now) is a fantastic investment that facilitates smooth workflows and saves a ton of time.
I created a script that adds tags to predominantly for tagging that allows the user to script select multiple tags, click add notes, and fill out what you want in the notes section. It doesnât overwrite any thing in the notes, it just adds it in the end. This way I can tag, as well as bulk add information to notes as necessary.
I donât mind adding tags like this for a small number of tasks, for example I have some tasks I tag with #i for important and I can create an âImportantâ perspective that shows me those.
What Iâd dearly love though is to be able to create an âUnimportantâ perspective that shows me anything without this field, but I canât think of a way to achieve that even if OF2 supported regular expressions in perspectives.
No doubt I could write a script on the Mac to add something to all tasks without the #i but I do most of my work on iOS so Iâd prefer to rely on innate supported features.
I have an @agendas context, with people as sub contexts, and an agenda single action list, whatever I need to follow up with anyone goes in there, and I link any calls to make mail to send , meetings etc to those contexts in the notes field, that way at least i do not need tags for people.
Personally having tried tagging, it just seems to a rabbit warren unless you have a strict minimal list of predefined tags, so have nearly really used it
I prefer to tag documents with meta data in the title âcode > >html > foundation > navigation barâ for example
BTW this is a dirt cheap text expander alternative https://www.trankynam.com/atext/ for anyone not happy with the subscription service.
Iâve just had a reply from Ken on Twitter this morning.
TAGS ARE COMING
Kenâs original tweet asked what weâd like to see in OF (iOS), so I replied: â@kcase I know it falls on deaf ears, but keyword tags. Tags, tags, tags, tags and tags.â
and got this back:
â@RichardOlpin Thanks! Thatâs planned. (This next update makes our file format extensible to allow us to add those and other new features.)â
Long-time fan (13 years) of text expanders. Instead of TextExpander (expensive), try out the $4.99 aText. Been using it for 3 years, and it works flawlessly with all OS up through the El Capitan.
Agreed, I kicked up when textexpander went subscription relented a paid a year with the discounted price. However just changed to atext it has some very clever date manipulation built in (as does textexpander) but in a far more user friendly UI, and for no money.
I have a feeling the textexpander code was shall we say âpaid homage toâ but given smiles attitude towards small users, I will go with atext.
Unless you really need some very advanced stuff or group sharing textexpander seems redundant now. There are very few apps worthy of a subscription model text, expansion utilities are not one of them.
Developing software in that way leads to bloated, bad applications. Itâs often a good idea not to add a feature.
It would be great to be able to add multiple contexts to a task, rather than have projects, contexts and tags. I wonder what the difference between a tag and a context could really be?
I agree, but to be fair, we should not forget that the developer will continue to offer and support the versions of Textexpander that donât need subscription:
Textexpander adjustments
That said, I think Atext sounds interesting, but I suppose Textexpander still is the only choice for IOS.
Grudgingly, once they realised the fire storm they created by ignoring the very people who made their business in the first placeâŚ
As I use an iPad pro with the external keyboard, 3rd party keyboards are pretty useless, plus of course the fill-in fields fields do not work on iOS anyway. I tend to use âcopiedâ for the main boilerplate text on iOS which for my minimal needs is fine.
I donât use 3rd party screen keyboards either, I use either the standard screen keyboard or an external keyboard, and I use Textexpander in those IOS apps that support it, including Omnifocus and Omnioutliner.
I donât believe it.
You can add fields to a database without losing backwards compatibility. Yes, the old app wonât be able to see those fields, and the new app wonât be able to work back and forth and retain those fields, but they can still provide fields in the new Appâs DB and warn folks of backward compatibility concerns, so those who want to move forward can move forward.
A new file format for the database has been introduced recently, and the backwards compatibility discussion is history. Tags will be coming, according to The Omni Group.
You donât believe what? You donât believe my post was accurate? You donât believe Omni Groupâs explanation (which, as Jan_H has noted, is now purely historical, the new format having been introduced)?
If itâs the former, provide some evidence that my explanation was inaccurate.
If itâs the latter, explain whether you think Omni are lying or simply too incompetent to see what is so clear to you.
With the old OmniFocus 1-compatible file format, the app would rewrite its XML archive from time to time and in the process it would lose track of any new data (both fields and records) that might have been recorded by a newer version of the app.
Our new file format (now shipping) handles this better, but OmniFocus 1 doesnât know how to read the newer format. So people who wish to continue syncing with OmniFocus 1 will continue to be limited to using the data OmniFocus 1 has always been able to understand, but people who use the latest version of the app will be able to take advantage of newer features as we introduce them to the file format. (Finally!)
