On Feb 2, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Mimi Yin wrote:

Features needed to establish a framework for the Triage workflow: (this is stuff beyond basic table)

• Ability to define focus (Now, Later, Done)
• Ability for users to tweak focus (Now, Today, Tonight, Later, Done)
• Ability to "put" items on lists via Labeling (ie. @Juno, Project: Foo, Calls list)

User scenarios for Stage 2 Dashboard with "Sections":

Jim is in a meeting with Kario and would like to see both his @Kario list and the list of items he's been maintaining for each of the projects he and Kario work on together:

• @Kario
• Project: Learn Kanji
• Project: Buy a notebook

Option 1 to meet this use case

• Add these 3 lists to the sidebar
• Overlay these 3 lists
• Summary pane splits into 3 panes, 1 for each list with independent scollbars

Option 2 to meet this use case

• Provide affordances to let user defined sections based on a mix of attributes in a single summary pane. Sections would NOT be tied to a single column.

Some sections might be:

• Triage status: Now
• Project: Foo
• @ Karin
• @ Work

SECTION BY COLUMN OPTION

• Allow sectioning by any column displayed in the summary pane: Who, Date, Stamping columns, and any columns the user defines
• User clicks on a column to section by that column

Some "Section by column" user scenarios

• To aid in search and scanning
• To view threads of items
• To review all of your projects in a single view

A couple more scenarios/issue related to sections. Please submit your own!

= User would like the ability to "divvy-up" the Triage sections into more fine-grain sections: ie. Now versus Today versus Tonight...

Some open issues re: this scenario: + Are Today and Tonight sub-sections of NOW? + Are Today and Tonight sub-Triage statuses? OR + Are we sub-sectioning Triage Status sections by Timeframe/Date?

We can answer this question by asking: + Are the items in the Today and Tonight sections: All my stuff for Today. All my stuff for Tonight? OR + Are the items in the Today and Tonight sections: All my stuff for Today that I am choosing to FOCUS on NOW?

For example, there may be a FYI things on your calendar for Today, but you don't want them to show up in your NOW-Today section. You only want to see them when you're looking at your calendar.

= Laying out your information in an organizational structure

There is also a bigger issue related to sections which has to do with the higher-level organizational needs some users have when trying to get a grip on large quantities of data.

For many people, the process of placing items into groupings and sub-groupings and sub-sub-groupings is crucial to their ability to understand the information they have and how new information they're receiving is relevant to them.

"Filing" essentially employs the "method of loci" technique Philippe posted an article about a couple of weeks ago...where people get a sense of the landscape of their information by arranging it or mapping it in a fixed location-based space:

A couple more scenarios/issue related to sections. Please submit your own!

User would like the ability to "divvy-up" the Triage sections into more fine-grain sections:

ie. Now versus Today versus Tonight...

Some open issues re: this scenario:

• Are Today and Tonight sub-sections of NOW?
• Are Today and Tonight sub-Triage statuses? OR
• Are we sub-sectioning Triage Status sections by Timeframe/Date?

We can answer this question by asking:

• Are the items in the Today and Tonight sections: All my stuff for Today. All my stuff for Tonight? OR
• Are the items in the Today and Tonight sections: All my stuff for Today that I am choosing to FOCUS on NOW?

For example, there may be a FYI things on your calendar for Today, but you don't want them to show up in your NOW-Today section. You only want to see them when you're looking at your calendar.

Laying out your information in an organizational structure

There is also a bigger issue related to sections which has to do with the higher-level organizational needs some users have when trying to get a grip on large quantities of data.

For many people, the process of placing items into groupings and sub-groupings and sub-sub-groupings is crucial to their ability to understand the information they have and how new information they're receiving is relevant to them.

"Filing" essentially employs the "method of loci" technique Philippe posted an article about a couple of weeks ago...where people get a sense of the landscape of their information by arranging it or mapping it in a fixed location-based space:

• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3152502.stm
• http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3181

It also allows people to "chunk things down" to a manageable number of groupings so that they can hold an "overall picture" of all of their information, in their head, in a single moment.

Some other people have also written in about how mind-maps are better for mapping information that's in your head onto "paper". See thread: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-January/003892.html

These are all very real problems that are in some sense at the core of Chandler as an Information Management System and they're directly related to many of the Virtuality discussions we've had in the past.

If Folders and Hierarchy are a good model for a location-based filed systems...what kind of metaphor does Chandler need with our "new world" data model?

Unfortunately, I think these "Organizational Paradigm" issues need to be addressed in several post 0.7 planning design meetings and is a problem that is probably out of scope for this release.