But always in the background I am thinking about the PIM. That's how we referred to it in my household "The PIM". I would wonder if I'm a little obsessed except I'm having so much fun.
I've been coding some commandline utilities to test the data model and, as I expected, I have run into the limitations of my original model. I had originally started with calendars, and agendas and so on being first class objects. What I mean by that is that they have some distinct existence in the real world , and that is why I am modeling them. What I have discovered is that calendars, address books, task lists, journals and so on are all simply semantically themed collections of stuff we care about.
There are few assertions I can make about what a calendar is that are universal enough to be easily recognizable to everyone.
So I stepped back and thought about it for a bit and this is what I have come up with: we have an ocean of first-class objects that we would like to track (incense, tasks, promises, contact information, little notes) and so on. And then we spend our time trying to organize them into multiple collections they give us easy access to what we want to do when we want to do.
So I am experimenting with having any of these collections simply be taxonomies. Just like described in an earlier post. This would mean that many calendars have a relationship to each other. An example would be the calendar I maintain for my children's schedule all together which could have two related calendars ( one for Aidan and one for Trent ) . both Trent and Aidan's calendar would refer to events in the Boy Scout calendar.
The same would be true of address books. I could have an address book that references my friends and a related address book that only has the subset of my college friends.
The same appears to work well for journals, agendas, sets of conversations, and the collection of resources and notes that I refer to as Data Mines or just Mines.