emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Rene <jlr_0@yahoo.com>
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Is OrgMode really GTD compliant?
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 20:51:19 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <loom.20140427T224929-90@post.gmane.org> (raw)

According to David Allen, whenever you define an action you need to
assign three pieces of information that you will later use as criteria
to decide what to do (in order of precedence):

 1. Context: Where should I be (@home, @work, etc.) and/or which tools
    should I have at my disposal (@computer, @internet, etc.) to do
    this action?
 2. Time needed: Which amount of time available must I have to do
    this action?
 3. Energy needed: How wasted/fresh can I be to do this action?

Then, when you're up for executing an action, you use "context", "time
available", and "energy available" as a sieve to sift out what can be
done. Only after you've looked at these three can you determine what
is the priority for right now, the present moment.

From the Getting Things Done perspective you don’t want to assign
“priority” to action items on the front end because as soon as the
situation changes and a couple of variables shift, as they are
guaranteed to do, it will alter the array of possibilities. So lots of
the action items you have rated at given priority levels are going to
change. And when they do, then you’re busy re-prioritizing all those
items.

This is why David Allen, states that "The `ABC' priority codes don’t work."

GTD suggests that priority makes a lot more sense to assess when you
know the complete "context+time available+energy available" of the
given moment.

Orgmode helps you capture
 - the context: by means of tags,
 - the time needed: by means of an "effort" property,
 - the ABC priorities: by means of cookies.

One notices:
 1) Orgmode offers a default implementation for priorities although
    this fourth criteria should not formally be dealt with according
    to GTD.
 2) The "energy" criteria is absent
 3) The word "effort" is misnamed as it reminds more of an energy
    measure than a duration.

Has anyone tried to customize orgmode so as to make it really GTD compliant?

             reply	other threads:[~2014-04-27 20:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-27 20:51 Rene [this message]
2014-04-28  0:21 ` Richard Lawrence
2014-04-28 17:18   ` Rene
2014-04-29  6:51     ` Alan Schmitt
2014-04-29 10:30       ` Samuel Loury
2014-04-29 10:49         ` Alan Schmitt
2014-04-29 13:26           ` Samuel Loury
2014-04-29 13:31             ` Bastien
2014-04-29 13:37               ` Alan Schmitt
2014-04-29 13:42                 ` Bastien

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.orgmode.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=loom.20140427T224929-90@post.gmane.org \
    --to=jlr_0@yahoo.com \
    --cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
    --subject='Re: Is OrgMode really GTD compliant?' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).