ForumsQuestionsIncrease priority's granularity please. Med Low High don't scale

Increase priority's granularity please. Med Low High don't scale
Author Message

Posted: Sep 04, 2010
Score: -1 Reference
Rather than allowing the manual ordering, Why not simply add more level of Priority,

There is currently only 4 level of priority, (negative ?) (Poor)

By the very definition of the word there can only be one TOP priority. (Wrong)

How are we supposed to order say +20 tasks by priority if they overlaps.

I suggest going from -1 to 10 and have a Up/Down arrow.

While on the subject,
It also make more sense that when I press the UP arrow the priority goes UP, It is now the opposite. (Wrong)

Also Some peoples pointed out here
Priority 1 should be the highest. This is also the opposite. (Wrong)

This message was edited Sep 04, 2010.

Posted: Sep 06, 2010
Score: 0 Reference
Approach to posting. (Wrong)

Posted: Sep 06, 2010
Score: -2 Reference
Attempt at making succinct and relevant comments. Fail.

Posted: Sep 06, 2010
Score: 0 Reference
In lieu of more levels of priority, you could try alpha numeric tags, folders, contexts, what have you. 01, 02, on through 99, or 001, 002, on through 999 if you wanted to break the bank with it. Or 1, 2, 2.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, etc.

You can do it with naming as well if you used the method described here-

Or have all, as in every single one, of your tasks as subtasks of one parent task, and order everything as you'd like.

Posted: Sep 08, 2010
Score: 0 Reference
good idead but It could mess my current tag usage, and hotlist would be near useless.

Thank you, for taking the time.

Posted: Nov 30, 2010
Score: 0 Reference
I also vote for more granularity in Priority. I would prefer 1-10. If you don't need them you would have to use them, but I need to be able to more finely tune the sort order.

And a quick thanks - I love toodledo and preach it to all my friends and colleauges (both of them, lol)

Toodledo Founder
Posted: Nov 30, 2010
Score: 1 Reference
Thanks for the suggestion. We can't comment on a timeframe for implementation, but this is on our to-do list.
You cannot reply yet

U Back to topic home

R Post a reply

To participate in these forums, you must be signed in.