| Welcome! | English (US) ![]() |
| Welcome! | English (US) ![]() |
What about having a start time?
Posted at 12:11am on October 3, 2006
this is similar to the timetracking idea in this thread here
Posted at 9:16am on October 3, 2006
I raise another vote for a start time. I checked out the time tracking thread. It is not what I am looking for in a 'start time'.
It would function more like a 'Suppress from view until this time'.
I would use it for Birthday Gift purchases (and so many more things). The task would be 'Buy wife b-day present'. It would be due 5-15-07, repeated yearly, suppress until 14 days before due.
I'm still learning RTM. I know some of this functionality can be done with Smart Lists, but I don't think that there is item level flexibility that way.
Posted at 3:31pm on October 11, 2006
says:While I have often wished for a similar feature, I have mostly taken care of this issue via a smart list. You can have a simple one, that's all events in the next n days, or you can get fancier with things like:
all priority 1 items for the next month AND all priority 2 items for the next 3 weeks AND all priority 3 items for the next 2 weeks AND all no priority items for the next week AND no recurring/repeating items unless they are tagged birthday
It's up to you to decide how subtle a list you want. My standard look ahead list is as follows:
dueWithin:"7 days of today" AND status:incomplete AND isRepeating:false
Since I track birthdays/anniveraries in Google Calendar, I don't need to see recurring events ahead, and I have another view for dealing with bills, which I do want to see coming, obviously.
I hope that's helpful; speak up if you need help crafting a smart list that works for you.
Posted at 8:11pm on October 11, 2006
Thanks for your comments. Using tags and Smart Lists, I came up with the following:
status:incomplete AND (((NOT tag:suppress1 AND NOT tag:suppress2 AND NOT tag:suppress3 AND NOT tag:suppress7 AND NOT tag:suppress14 AND NOT tag:suppress30) AND dueWithin:"7 days of today") OR (tag:suppress1 due:today) OR (tag:suppress2 AND dueWithin:"2 days of today") OR (tag:suppress3 AND dueWithin:"3 days of today") OR (tag:suppress7 AND dueWithin:"7 days of today") OR (tag:suppress14 AND dueWithin:"14 days of today") OR (tag:suppress30 AND dueWithin:"30 days of today") OR due:never)
with nicer formating for readability:
status:incomplete
AND
((
(NOT tag:suppress1 AND NOT tag:suppress2 AND NOT tag:suppress3 AND NOT tag:suppress7 AND NOT tag:suppress14 AND NOT tag:suppress30)
AND dueWithin:"7 days of today")
OR (tag:suppress1 due:today)
OR (tag:suppress2 AND dueWithin:"2 days of today")
OR (tag:suppress3 AND dueWithin:"3 days of today")
OR (tag:suppress7 AND dueWithin:"7 days of today")
OR (tag:suppress14 AND dueWithin:"14 days of today")
OR (tag:suppress30 AND dueWithin:"30 days of today")
OR due:never)
The goal was to
1. Display only incomplete items.
2. Display non-suppressed items 7 days before due.
3. Display suppress items only within N days based on suppressN tag.
4. Display all items without a due date.
It is setup for suppressing until 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, or 30 days until the due date.
I haven't fully tested it -- lack of time and annoyance of logic. There maybe a misplaced parenthesis. If anyone expresses interest, I'll post any fixes.
Posted at 3:05am on October 12, 2006
says:I'm impressed. I'm not sure I'd have the discipline for such fine grained suppression, but I can see the value immediately.
Of course, such shenanigans wouldn't be necessary with a start field (right, Emily? Emily?)
Please post back rueful with your relfections on how useful this is and how cumbersome it is to maintain.
Posted at 6:03am on October 12, 2006
Please, please... just another voice adding to the din here, begging y'all to add start date capability.
There are so many circumstances in which this'd be useful:
- the aforementioned birthday-gift purchase
- working on tasks that can't be started until AFTER items or infobits are procured at a later time.
- seasonal stuff (no, I am not going to clean my bbq in the dead of winter!)
...and so on.
Thanks in advance for getting this surprising omission rectified :)
Posted at 3:02am on October 15, 2006