Eventhough I have been using Tinderbox for a long time only recently I have started to use the adornment function. I got inspired by some recent postings that discussed the use of this function for course planning. Since course planning is always a bit of a drag for me, I thought using Tinderbox could make the task both more fun and more productive and efficient.
One of the biggest obstacles I have found is that there seems to be a undesirable interaction between adornments and containers. As far as I know, adornments only exist in the Map View and they are just a visual tool. That means that in principle the association of a particular note to a particular adornment in the map view should not affect the way the note is classified and stored in the data base underlying Tinderbox.
Here’s what happens, though. I have notes organized in different containers but when a note meets the requirements to be part of a particular adornment in the Map View and moves to that adornment, it loses its place in the container where I had put it in the outline view.
Let me give you a specific example to make it clear.
I have a list of readings classified under a container called ‘READINGS’, within this container there are other subcontainers with different types of readings. Finally there is a note for every reading with a summary and other relevant pieces of information.
In the Map View I made an adornment called ‘CURRENT WEEK’. In that adornment I created a query with a particular ‘DueDate’. The idea is that the different notes for particular readings or particular tasks with that due date will flock to that adornment when the condition is met.
This worked very well in my first test but when I go back to the outline view I notice that all the notes that went to that adornment are now outside their original containers.
This should not happen, should it?