OmniFocus3 - Save Our Contexts

GTD is wildly misunderstood and often misrepresented… it’s wholly platform agnostic. It is supposed to be guidance. The essence ie the five steps; capture, clarify, organise, engage, reflect are universal… it doesn’t dictate any more. Contexts are introduced as a method of subsetting that list (if it’s too big!) - why would any efficient system present you with tasks that you can’t feasibly do?.. if the context is at parents house, no point me seeing that in my active tasks to do right now. It’s no more or less… it’s intended to be a palette from which you choose the colours that work for you… even if you don’t ‘do’ GTD you will be doing GTD… unless of course you are keeping it all in your head, not clarifying, are not organising, don’t bother reflecting and end up disengaged 😉

5 Likes

Not to derail the original topic, but I wanted to clarify the statement “[GTD is] wholly platform agnostic” as I think this a misrepresentation of the methodology from an objective standpoint. While yes, David has, many times in fact, deflected advocating for one platform or another with respect to GTD and its implementation; he, however, also has only really shown the prevalence of GTD in regards to a paper-based system. The book strongly steers towards this type of implementation (if not explicitly stating so) with phraseology such as “automatic file labeler”, “file folders”, and using the context “At Computer” (i.e. it is redundant to have “At Computer” as a context if you are using your computer to view your lists) ergo David is suggesting to use paper based lists / system and that he uses(ed) such a system. This is also further illustrated throughout several places in the book but suffice it to say that GTD is not a “platform agnostic” methodology per the original “tactical manual” as David calls it despite the best intentions and efforts to assert that it is.

However, do not get me wrong, because I am not saying GTD does not add value to a prospective reader or productivity enthusiast, but I would recommend, as I stated earlier, to move beyond GTD (or even “pure GTD”) and research or utilize other productivity methodologies / best practices. GTD has a mix useful information and not so useful or relevant information. I have never taken much into GTD as a pure system (I do say I implement GTD, but I never say that I practice in devoutly with perfection…as I do not think any productivity system or methodology is that good).

I am glad the OmniGroup is moving towards a “productivity system & methodology agnostic” line of thinking and product development as it will only help them. Now, if they would only start creating Windows counterparts to their Mac products they could tap a large mass of unmet customers / customer needs. Cross-platform software is not an optional goal today, it is a requirement with almost everyone else being able to do so via various frameworks and platforms. Ah well, here’s looking at you kid (i.e. Ken Case).


Another note, for those citing an increase in the complexity of such a change (most likely being GTD aficionados as the OP referred to), I would refer you to David Allen’s argument about information overload and nature. It is not that it is introducing complexity into a system, but rather that you do not know where or how many of the snakes and bears are hiding in the jungle of tags you created for yourself. As someone who has a 125+ tagging system, and uses a mixture of approximately 20 +/- 5 per day per next action / task (note, I do not follow the Next Action -> Project model per strict GTD), I can tell you that it makes my storage and retrieval of to-do’s so much more efficient and dynamic because I can adapt to the ever changing world around me and come out surfing on top of my workload without any problems. Having “one and only one” context would lead to crashing and burning in the fast paced world of today.

I look forward to seeing what OmniFocus 3 has to offer (assuming it ships in the first half of this year).

4 Likes

no flack from me. i think the days when the app. belonged to GTD zealots have long gone. how many contexts (within the strict GTD definition) now simply boil down to ‘@ devices’ or ‘@ online’ for example. I for one am quite excited (within limits - i do actually have a life) about the prospect of the flexibility of tagging.

For my fellow GTDers - and I recognize many people who use OF are not necessarily GTDers–I offer my refined thinking on this issue.

I was a little troubled before (as you can see from my post above) about the deprecation of the term “context,” but I realize where I might have been mistaken. First, I was concerned that the role played by contexts would be diminished in OF such that the symbiotic pairing of project and context was being fundamentally re-thought. After seeing @wilsonng’s post on this (The OmniFocus 3 for iOS TestFlight preview), it is clear to me that the importance that contexts has as an OF dimension remains the same under this new concept of tags, and only the name has been changed.

Second, I was concerned that the re-imagining of contexts as tags was fundamentally changing the concept of contexts in ways that would be incompatible with GTD. I re-read the sections of chapters 7 and 9 of Getting Things Done dealing with contexts. Doing so has made me realize that this tags feature is perfectly “compliant” with GTD contexts. David Allen’s conception of contexts is more flexible than most of us (myself included) seem to have been treating the subject. While I agree the concept of contexts is sacred, as @daryl noted, the sacredness comes from the function it performs not by the name we call it. (“A rose by any other name…” and all that.) Here are some helpful excerpts that I discovered.

When I refer to a “list,” keep in mind that I mean nothing more than a grouping of items with some similar characteristic. A list could look like one of at least three things: (1) a file folder or container with separate paper notes for the items within the category; (2) an actual list on a titled piece of paper (often within a loose-leaf organizer or planner); or (3) an inventory of items on a list in a software program or in a digital mobile device.

Excerpt From: David Allen & James Fallows. “Getting Things Done.” iBooks. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/getting-things-done/id888011802?mt=11

Over many years I have discovered that the best way to be reminded of an “as soon as I can” action is by the particular context required for that action—that is, either the tool or the location or the situation needed to complete it.

Excerpt From: David Allen & James Fallows. “Getting Things Done.” iBooks. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/getting-things-done/id888011802?mt=11

As you begin to implement this methodology consistently, you will invariably find inventive ways to tailor your own contextual categories to fit your situation. Though sorting by the tool or physical location required is most common, there are often other uniquely useful ways to filter your reminders.

Before I go on a long trip, I will create “Before Trip” as a temporary category into which I will move everything from any of my action lists that must be handled before I leave. That becomes the only list I need to review, until they’re all done.

Excerpt From: David Allen & James Fallows. “Getting Things Done.” iBooks. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/getting-things-done/id888011802?mt=11

Most importantly, on this topic is this admonition from Allen:

There is no “right” way to structure your Next Actions lists—only what works best for you, and that part of your system will likely change as your life does.*

Excerpt From: David Allen & James Fallows. “Getting Things Done.” iBooks. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/getting-things-done/id888011802?mt=11

The goal of tags is to batch tasks, to make sure you are looking at tasks you can actually do in a given environment, and to reduce the amount of tasks you are looking at to a manageable amount. The new tags feature (again based on what I’ve seen in @wilsonng’s post) is a much more robust tool for accomplishing this.

Would I have still preferred OF retain the word “context”? Yes. I’d be lying if I expressed otherwise. I’ve been using the term context (and enjoying the functionality of contexts) for about 13 years now. Old customs and habits die very hard. But I think tags covers broader territory than contexts. On that basis, I can have context based tags: phone; errands; home; office. But I can also have tags for people, for specific devices, for energy level (not likely something I will use). I have contexts for those now, but it never made sense to me that some contexts were places, some were tools, some were people. Now I can have multiple channels. Contexts as an organizing principle is more limited than tags are. And tags are more flexible.

Bottom line for me is that even as at pretty strict GTDer, I am at peace with both the functionality and terminology of tags in favor of contexts.

P.S. With the power of custom perspectives, we probably could create a perspective called contexts and have it configured pretty much the same way as it exists right now, anyway.

5 Likes