Re: BLOGing/Journaling/ACTing [Was: OGo and asterisk, SUMMARY]

On Dec 13, 2006, at 19:03, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> Why don't you use a project, that is the notes of a project, for  
>> that?
> I wasn't aware of project classification then.  There is also the  
> issue of linking the contact to the appropriate project;  but  
> doable via an object link or a property.

I'm not sure what you mean. Projects are linked to contacts anyways?  
(associated contacts/companies).

>> Just because it a note has no type?
>> Because you can't enter the date of a note?
> Both actually.  Both of these things could be added to a note via  
> an object property.  (Now i wonder if that is true, that I can't  
> enter a date on a note.  If I specify a date in the command to  
> create a note what will happen...)

Well, even if this is possible, it would be a bug ;-) Creation/ 
modification dates are internal, if you want a user-defined date, we  
should add a property or a column.

For the type we could probably reuse the file extension since notes  
have no visible filename anyways.


>>> 2. A work journal.
>>> This is for lawyer and engineering types.  This seems like it  
>>> would be
>>> related to a project,  but the end-user really looks at it as a  
>>> journal.
>>> So some way to query and present a view of all entries by a  
>>> particular
>>> user is needed,  which may traverse multiple "projects"  (at  
>>> least how
>>> the end-user is thinking of the concept of "project").  This is  
>>> the one
>>> that seems really arbitrary - and they REALLY want it a certain way
>>> [ lawyers and engineers... if you haven't had the pleasure... :) ]
>> I can't follow that completely. Isn't that tasks? Attached to  
>> projects
>> and also shows up in an overview.
> I personally would think so, yes.  But how that operates doesn't  
> really correspond to how the users view the issue.  Tasks open and  
> close and are fairly specific,  Journal entries are strictly  
> chronological and variously 'categorized' entires intermix  
> chronologically.  But I think I have this one licked anyway.

Hm, so maybe its a "notes" overview. Currently we show notes only in  
appointment and project viewers, maybe we should have a top-level  
"Notes" application which cummulates the records.
Sounds useful. In fact notes seem to be a perfect fit for journal items.


>>>> Most objects in OGo already do have a "journal" (tasks,  
>>>> appointments,
>>>> projects). I suspect whats actually needed is some kind of
>>>> "reporting" frontend here? Possibly just an RSS feed which  
>>>> cumulates
>>>> the "notes" of the individual object types?
>>> I agree,  at least on Tasks.  Otherwise they only 'sort of' have a
>>> journal;  notes could work but I think the functionality would  
>>> need some
>>> tweaking.
>> I was referring to notes. What is missing?
> Contacts don't have notes, this is one of the big issues.  Of  
> course a project can be created for each contact.

Well, my personal opinion is that notes are always bound to a  
"context" aka a project (eg "sell xyz to abc" [a project] or "case  
333, murder vh" [a project]). Even if you just start out with one  
context (aka project) per contact.

So I suppose whats really missing here is a faster way to create  
projects. And possibly a tab which displays the notes of all projects  
associated with a contact.

Greets,
   Helge
-- 
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/


-- 
OpenGroupware.org Discussion [email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss