ForumsQuestionsFeature Request: "In Process" Checkbox type
Feature Request: "In Process" Checkbox type
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Ummagumma |
I'd like to ask you to add a 3rd Checkbox type
[ ] = not started (current) [•] = in process (new) [x] = completed (current) |
|
Jake Toodledo Founder |
Thanks for the suggestion. Can you please look at the "Status" field or tag field. I think with one of those you'll be able to do what you want to do. Some people also use the star to mark tasks that are in progress.
|
|
Ummagumma |
I am using the Star field to indicate tasks that I will work on today. AFAIK many people use it for this.
Status does not = "In process", IMHO. Things like "Next Action", "Active", "Planned" etc. to me specify the order in which these tasks need to be executed, so a task can be both "Next Action" or "Active" and "Not started". And tags can be used for this, but they take time to apply, change or remove, especially on mobile devices. A checkbox style can be accessed with a single tap. |
|
Salgud |
It seems to me that this is a "Status", rather than a separate click box. The click box, though more accessible, adds more complexity to the interface, and takes up more space (particularly valuable space on a mobile device). Not to mention that an additional Status would require far less programming time.
If you're a fairly flexible kind of thinker, you could just use one of the statuses that you aren't already using, say Planning, and make that you're "In Progress" Status. I recognize that some people can do this, and others find it an abomination. :) This message was edited Dec 13, 2016. |
|
Olivir2015 |
My way of dealing with the "In Progress" is combination of start date and timer. Of course, the start date is mostly for hiding tasks till the date I am ready to work on them, the timer does primarily give me a feedback on how time-consuming the completing of the task was, but also tells me I have already done something on the task. If any progress report is needed (like where exactly I have stopped), I use the task note for that.
This message was edited Dec 14, 2016. |
|
cj |
I kind of like like idea of a progress checkbox ... showing %done. I know - this is sort of a combination of using the Status field and Start Date/Timer ... but having a progress field would indeed be a little productivity booster. So +1 that ....
|
|
coolexplorer |
Posted by cj:
I kind of like like idea of a progress checkbox ... showing %done. I know - this is sort of a combination of using the Status field and Start Date/Timer ... but having a progress field would indeed be a little productivity booster. So +1 that .... I can see how a progress bar could be a motivator. An alternate way as per GTD would be to clarify/break down bigger tasks (projects) into bite-able sizes of 5-15-30 minutes each so that we don't need a progress indicator, but just a done or not done check-box .... to progress the project as a whole. If you turn the checked tasks display on it could show how much of a project is done and what is left, in addition the timings given to each task (if you use that field) could also help show the progress made. Maybe what can be considered is for the TD program to total the amount of time of all sub-tasks of a Parent (Project), and display the hours of work left. This message was edited Dec 15, 2016. |
|
Ummagumma |
One of the PIMs I used in the past had this feature. It was extremely useful.
Basically, instead of having a 2-state checkbox (empty or checked), you get a 3-state checkbox - empty, with a thick dot in the middle, and checked. |
|
Salgud |
Posted by Ummagumma:
One of the PIMs I used in the past had this feature. It was extremely useful. Basically, instead of having a 2-state checkbox (empty or checked), you get a 3-state checkbox - empty, with a thick dot in the middle, and checked. I like that. It makes more sense to me than a separate box, and probably less programming time. |
|
Olivir2015 |
I think that depends on the underlying database - does the corresponding field allow just 0/1 values or tripple state (if there is only single field, of course)? Any change to the DBS structure could be extremely dangerous.
Posted by Salgud: I like that. It makes more sense to me than a separate box, and probably less programming time. |
|
Ummagumma |
Posted by Salgud:
I like that. It makes more sense to me than a separate box, and probably less programming time. That's what I was proposing, probably not clear enough. I am not asking to add yet another checkbox, but to change the existing one from 2-state to 3-state. This message was edited Dec 16, 2016. |
|
Salgud |
Posted by Ummagumma:
Posted by Salgud: I like that. It makes more sense to me than a separate box, and probably less programming time. That's what I was proposing, probably not clear enough. I am not asking to add yet another checkbox, but to change the existing one from 2-state to 3-state. Re-reading your original post, I misinterpreted it. It's a good idea as presented. |
|
Jake Toodledo Founder |
It is an interesting idea. I'll put it on our todo list.
|
You cannot reply yet
U Back to topic home
R Post a reply
To participate in these forums, you must be signed in.