[Fwd: Re: Another GTD question.]

[Charles Cave <charles_cave@optusnet.com.au>]

Pete,

I'm sure you meant to reply to the list instead of just me,
so I am taking the liberty of forwarding you response to the list.

Your response makes a lot of sense .. keeping the contexts and
agendas as a set of tags allowing full taking of action items
and discussion points in the one project hierarchy.

Charles

  > From: Pete Phillips <pete@smtl.co.uk>


>>>>> "Charles" == Charles Cave <charles_cave@optusnet.com.au> writes:

     Charles> Your observations are correct. I was pushing the use of
     Charles> org-mode tags to cater for identifying contexts for lists
     Charles> as well as making pure lists.

     Charles> I think it is best to structure the org-mode file to keep
     Charles> the agenda items for each person separate from the tags.
     Charles> So, if I want to make a list of things to talk about with
     Charles> Andrew, I will have a section for Andrew, and similarly for
     Charles> items to discuss with Belinda.

I found that keeping the list of projects, with tasks as follows:

* Revision of IV document
** Discuss changes with Jo :Joanna:
** Order references from Library :Office:

and tagging the task with the user name is best for me - I can either
print out my lists by tags, or more usually, when the person is in my
office, execute

	Ctrl-\ Joanna

to get a list of things I need to discuss with her. I found that keeping
lists under each person meant that I would frequently forget that there
was an action elsewhere I had to track/update. By keeping *all* project
tasks together and using tags for contexts, agenda's etc, I can see all
of a project in one go.

Using Charles' system:

** Andrew
*** My annual performance review
*** Discuss PROJECT X delivery date

I would not necessarily remember to update PROJECT X list items after
speaking to Andrew (yes - this may well be a function of my age!).

Pete