priorities in tasks

Joon Radley joon at
Fri Jan 28 06:12:51 CET 2005

Hi Martin,

> looking closer at the priority handling I got the impression 
> that the current schema is not optimal.
> IMHO it is better if the the xml format is large scale (e.g. 
> 1-9) and the clients rescale to their lower resolution when 
> displaying. Only when a client _writes_ a task to the imap 
> store it is required to loose resolution.
> What do you think?

Three things needs to be considered and explained:

1) Boundary values like 3 and 7 in the scale of 1-9. In a 1-3 scale client
(low, normal, high), is 3 low or normal and is 7 normal or high?

2) With the interchange of data between clients you can have a loss of data.
If you have a task that must be at 4. When it converted a client with a 1-3
scale it will now be converted to "normal" and when this is translated back
it will be 5. If the distinction between 4 and 5 is very important, the data
will be lost.

3) The last issue is interoperability. If the boss assigns the task a
priority of 6 in one client the employee on a another client will see it in
effect as a 5(normal). Depending on how important the difference is between
5 and 6 for the manager the employee can get in trouble.

We must be careful with priority translation as it is a very sensitive issue
between humans and not just groupware object.

Best regards

Joon Radley
Radley Network Technologies CC
Cell: +27 (0)83 368 8557
Fax: +27 (0)12 998 4346
E-mail: joon at

More information about the format mailing list