let's say you have a task item like: "Finish the basement"
You should spend a little time working thru some of the examples provided in the online manual. Much of the manual is being written by users like us so you may find the approach is less technical but offer more practical information. I've found it very helpful on many an occasion
"Finish the basement" can be assigned (therefore appear) in various grids.
Again, for example, let's say
the task is scheduled for Tuesday
the task is assigned to Jim's Contracting Co,
the task is assigned to Tom who works for Jim's Contracting Co.
so
Grid 1 could be your weekly schedule & "Finish the basement" would appear under Tuesday in the following way
Tuesday
"Finish the basement"
Grid 2 might be a list of all your task items in the re-modeling of your house & "Finish the basement" would appear in the following way:
"Finish the basement" and in a cell next to it "Jim's Contracting Co."
Grid 3 might be a contact list of all the employees of all the contractors including "Jim's Contracting Co" & "Finish the basement" you appear in the following way
Contractor A
Contractor B
Jim's Contracting Co
Tom
"Finish the basement"
You could also see all this information in one Grid as well & it might appear in the following way:
Task Day of week Start Date Completion Date Contractor Carpenter
Remodel of House
Finish Basement Tue July 1 July 10 Jim's Contracting Co. Tom
However you have only added "Finish the basement" a single time. It is a single item that can appear in many contexts
Now this may seem a little complicated to you right now but it is very simple once you grasp the idea. While there are times you may want to actually make a copy or clone of an item, most times it's really a matter of assigning different fields to it.
You should spend a little time working thru some of the examples provided in the online manual. Much of the manual is being written by users like us so you may find the approach is less technical but offer more practical information. I've found it very helpful on many an occasion
HTH
- jan_rifkinson's Blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
I'm not sure what to think about this split button matter. I don't have problems with it myself.
Maybe is the suggestion of repeating the menu title in the menu options a good compromise, but it also seems to be redundant.
Probably better to just have a *standard menu* then (menu title, click, then access the submenu items).
(Note that the split button implementation in the "Find" dialog ("Quick Search", in fact ctrl-f) is exactly as it should. And even this seemed to cause problems to some users -- like Jon, for instance.)
Slightly off-topic (could create another thread): As far as homogeneity and standards go, I'd first start with coherent terminology everywhere and insuring that menus items and dialogs share the same names. E.g. problem : when you click on "Find" menu item, you get a "quick search dialog"; When you click on manage grids, you get "manage grids" but when you click on "manage fields" you get "field management"; Clicking on "New item" shows an "add item..." dialog, etc. These are small things but they help understanding the app... and communicating when there are issues to be fixed.)
Thanks
P.s. : Dave, what application are you using for your great screencasts ?
Hi Tom and Dave,
Thanks for your comments.
Please don't get me wrong... I'm just voicing a personal opinion to offer a different perspective. I'm definitely not trying to force my view upon you -- and I don't even have any clear-cut view on that one! I totally respect the fact the split button is confusing for some or the majority.
Like you, my hope is that the changes/modifications made are for the better (i.e. : increased usability) and that they respond to the majority of IQ users' needs. So if that means no more split button or just a different/improved one etc., so be it, I'm all for it. :)
==============
What I'm talking about in the "Slightly off-topic" paragraph : sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I was referring to the expressions/words used in the IQ menu items not being the same as the expressions/words in the dialog's title bar they trigger.
E.g. : Edit -> click on Find --> Dialog appears but the title bar says Quick Search. The consequence is that users might look for Quick search instead of "find" in the menus, or (conversely) might not know what someone's talking about when speaking about "quick search", etc.
Dave : thanks for the Camtasia link. I actually use Jing and it works well too. Of course, it doesn't have as many features, etc.
Whatever is more convenient for Pierre and the users.
Many Mantis entries might be a bit longer to create but it's easier to mark what's been solved and what hasn't. Mantis is more precise in many aspects since it's been designed for bug entries etc.
If we have a long list here and just one mantis entry, the mantis entry will have to remain open, and someone will have to maintain the list etc.
there are pros and cons to both ways.
>although I know you were trying to get that stopped and I find that in general a good idea...
I was strictly speaking about comments, not the actual editing. Everybody editing the manual is not only fine but necessary. However, having 10 comments at the end of a manual page can be annoying. (Isn't that why you wrote -- link to nonexistent node ID 294 --?). But if it's not perceived as problematic by Keith and other heavy manual contributors, I won't/don't mind.
I like Mantis very much. :) But if its entries are going to fall into oblivion and not stimulate any activity around the subject, it,s a poor choice. So considering what you said about editing, and the fact that most users don't use or look at Mantis, forget what I said. A list with a Mantis reference (just so that the list, with its discussions, doesn't sink into the forum's depth) should do the job.
Thanks
I created a the manual page and a mantis entry referring to it. -- link to nonexistent node ID 2307 --
If you want me to edit the Mantis entry, just say it and I'll do it.