Skip to main content

Home/ Chandler Project/ Group items tagged collaboration

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Graham Perrin

Chandler Wiki : Zero Point One Email 20060508 - 0 views

  • Pull down emails that have special headers
    • Graham Perrin
       
      I don't understand this point.
  • one-time import of an Inbox
  • Proposed Plan
  • ...21 more annotations...
  • Email support for collaboration workflows
  • DnD from select email clients
  • One-time download of new mail with special Chandler headers
    • Graham Perrin
       
      Is this implemented in 1.0.2?
  • One-time download of new mail from select IMAP folders
    • Graham Perrin
       
      My sense is that this is implemented in 1.0.2.
  • Set up IMAP server
  • allow users to move email from their existing email account to the desktop
    • Graham Perrin
       
      In 1.0.2 I suspect that e-mail is copied (not (copied then deleted) moved).
  • provided they are on the same machine
    • Graham Perrin
       
      Can we more clearly define 'same machine'?
    • Graham Perrin
       
      I see no requirement for IMAP client and Chandler Desktop to be on the same computer. IMAP client at computer A communicates a user-initiated move of a message to one of three Chandler Desktop-specific IMAP mailboxes. Chandler Desktop at computer B performs a one-time download from those three mailboxes.
  • early adopter, metrotechnicals as experimental email users
  • One-time download of new mail from IMAP
  • Basic message composition
  • Required features for supporting collaboration workflows
  • Reply, reply all, forward
  • Send and receive
  • rich text editing
  • draft, queued, sent, read, unread, needs reply, replied to, forwarded
  • email status column
  • Email threading support
  • overall clustering solution
  • stamping communications workflows
  • Features not targeted for 1.0
  • Drag and drop emails and attachments from other email clients
Graham Perrin

The Chandler Project Blog » Blog Archive » OSAF's Next Steps - 0 views

  • Chandler succeeds at meeting the needs of users who are tracking ‘knowledge work’
  • Chandler is not oriented around calendaring per se or around a complicated task and project landscape with many dependencies
  • we want Chandler to be more viral. We want Chandler to be easy to explain to others. We want Chandler to be found in contexts where people are already spending time. We want Chandler to be
  • ...17 more annotations...
  • even more useful as that user pulls in other people to collaborate
  • We want happy users be successful evangelists for Chandler
  • web widgets that might be deployed in different contexts — iGoogle, Facebook, on an iPhone, etc.
  • widgets should be compelling to a new user who does not use the desktop, in addition to providing features that complement the desktop. Eventually, the widgets can be building blocks
  • misperception in the press
  • Being a CalDAV reference implementation is not a priority.
  • the Microsoft product with the most overlap with our design objectives is probably OneNote
  • web widgets (in the browser, on mobile devices and on the desktop)
  • not trying to be a GTD specific tool
  • Chandler’s philosophy is different enough from GTD that it would be misleading to call Chandler a GTD tool
  • Our best articulation of our core value to date is: Chandler is a way to manage and collaborate on ideas using: A List View built around the idea of the Triage Workflow A Calendar View Chandler Hub Sharing Service
  • the user problem we are serving is an emerging market
  • there isn’t a shared, public vocabulary to describe what we’re doing
  • Better product messaging so that people understand what ‘user problem’ we’re trying to solve and how we’re trying to solve it.
  • more ways to get data in and out
  • we will not be implementing CalDAV scheduling
    • Graham Perrin
       
      CalDAV scheduling is just one aspect of CalDAV; see http://caldav.calconnect.org/standards.html
  • We’re not looking to be a cheaper alternative to Outlook/Exchange. This means we’re not investing in support for free/busy-style scheduling. We’re not looking to be the ‘everyman’s’ version of Microsoft Project or Bug and Ticket-Tracking systems. This means we’re not investing in support for complex task and project management, e.g. task dependencies, tracking percent done, time estimates, robust support for assigning tasks, etc. We’re also not going to be implementing the GTD methodology.
  •  
    February 6th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Graham Perrin

Chandler Wiki : Vision - 0 views

  • Custom Attribute
  • Custom Attribute
  • The Chandler Knowledge Worker
  • ...42 more annotations...
  • Information is the substance of their work and more information is the output of their work: Research, proposals, priorities, direction and decisions?
  • knowledge is gained and shared
  • how people actually work
  • (too) many interesting things
  • There's something wrong with the way data
  • doesn't flow between the tools we use to manage, process, organize our information
  • software should be modeled around information
  • technological barriers
  • too much copying and pasting
  • false assumption that information management tasks are binary
  • false assumption underlying most productivity software that information and the organizational structures needed to manage that information are essentially static
  • A lone email languishes for a long time in your Inbox and then all of a sudden, blooms into an unending thread which dies down
  • the thread is revived and mushrooms into a full scale project
  • Three weeks later
  • you barely give it a thought
    • Graham Perrin
       
      I tend to find myself involved in: at one extreme, very many varied small tasks, which are recorded/archived then intentionally forgotten; and at the other extreme: projects about which thought extends months or even years later. Between the two extremes: for me, things are hazy.
  • the same workflow hiccups show up again and again
  • an information management environment with built-in workflows that mirror what people hack together
  • three basic workflows everybody seems to construct for themselves, regardless of what tools they use
  • varying degrees of complexity and automation
  • These three workflows however, need to exist independently of each other
  • no complicated rule-builder
  • push-button interface
  • always assume a need for iteration and change over time
  • Peeling the Onion
  • Allow Organization to Change and Flow
  • the entire gamut of organizational affordances
  • Tagging
  • Filing, Rules, et cetera
  • won't ever be asked to decide between them
  • turn it into a Custom Attribute
  • Add semantics to a Tag
  • Custom Attribute
  • Drag a Tag or a Cluster to the sidebar
  • a Cluster: a way to thread items together, a way to reflect dependencies
  • Group collaboration systems exist in parallel with personal communication tools
  • does not scale down to work for small groups
  • the majority of the significant emails we send are sent while still in a draft-state
    • Graham Perrin
       
      This is very thought-provoking.
  • Future
  • a well-defined end-user information model
  • by modeling the user experience around how people work today and the substance of that work, we can be more than just another software tool and instead aspire to be a system for information management: A smarter way to work. A better environment for collaboration
  • We want Chandler to be able to talk to other applications
  • As we make Chandler's end-user information model richer, the number of interesting applications to talk to will increase. This is one of the many areas where we hope that people in the community will help increase Chandler's ability to talk to other applications
Graham Perrin

Checkvist: collaborative online outliner and checklist - 0 views

shared by Graham Perrin on 04 Jan 09 - Cached
  • Extensive use of keyboard navigation and shortcuts
Graham Perrin

Chandler Wiki : Get Started - 0 views

  • Collaborate on Notes and Events over Email
    • Graham Perrin
       
      IMHO the e-mail capabilities of Chandler 1.0.2 require special explanation. Some explanations are offered within the FAQ, http://www.diigo.com/annotated/faf93764c6f6f5eb9a29268ad4b472de
    • Graham Perrin
       
      The number and nature of the special explanations, criteria and limitations of e-mail in Chandler Desktop make me think that 'Email' its sub-headings, as currently presented in 'Get Started', should not appear in Get Started.
    • Graham Perrin
       
      I suggest leaving references, from the Get Started page, to pages that are dedicated to: (1) an overview of e-mail in Chandler Hub and Chandler Desktop, and of limited communications with IMAP and POP servers; (2) using Chandler Desktop to configure an IMAP server, and understanding the workflows (in particular, the aspects that are one-way, periodic (Chandler Desktop sync) and incremental (the effect of adding messages to a Chandler-specific mailbox that was previously synced)); (3) e-mail in Chandler Hub; (4) e-mail in Chandler Deskop.
    • Graham Perrin
       
      Critically: the overview should contain no instructions on use; it should present, in pictures and in few words as possible, the current workflow and vision, plus maybe no more than one vision of the future.
Graham Perrin

Open Source Applications Foundation - 0 views

  • Enable sharing with colleagues, friends and family
  • unique and under-served needs of small group collaboration
1 - 7 of 7
Showing 20 items per page