InfoQube IM - Community

Submitted by Armando on 2009/08/20 12:46

[SORRY : multiple edits : problems with the English language this afternoon...]

This thread follows up a discussion started in the Grid Source EditBox thread from the manual.

I'll just continue from there...

=========================

I understand your point, but a similar argument could be made for the "reverse" situation (where a TLI in a grid with a single source is demoted and a that same TLI disappears from another grid with an "AND binded fields" source) -- and that's why I'm having troubles with IQ automatically removing field assignation in the first place (an opinion you are somewhat corroborating in your example).

Following your example, the reverse of is also true :

1- if the "Butternut Squash" appears as a TLI in 3 grids depending on 3 different sets of sources (ie : you supposed that "Butternut Squash" also appeared in grids which sources are "Culinary" and "Nutrition")
        - "Culinary AND Nutrition"
      - "Culinary"
      - "Nutrition"

2- and if I demote "Butternut Squash" in the Grid with only "Culinary" field as source... What happens to the TLI "Butternut Squash" in the "Culinary AND Nutrition" grid? It disappears... in the same way as in your example (when you talk about demoting a TLI in the "Nutrition and culinary" grid).

IMO This is not "acceptable" either.<

Comments

[quote=Armando]

2- and if I demote "Butternut Squash" in the Grid with only "Culinary" field as source... What happens to the TLI "Butternut Squash" in the "Culinary AND Nutrition" grid? It disappears... in the same way as in your example (when you talk about demoting a TLI in the "Nutrition and culinary" grid).

IMO This is not "acceptable" either.<

[/quote]

Greetings Armando

I would agree with you, except that I don't yet understand why a simple source is unflagged when a TLI is demoted. Perhaps Pierre can tell us, or it's discussed somewhere. For now, I don't see the advantage; that's why I asked in the Manual thread why we would not turn Inheritance On to protect a grid's Source field.

If there's a good reason IQ unflags on demotion -- something to do with Hierarchy perhaps? -- then ANDed sources are collateral damage, as the AND condition is no longer being met. But from here, auto-unflagging seems like nothing but trouble. Not only will items seem to vanish, but the property value "Shown in N Grids" is tied to Source fields, and seems to miss items in certain grids.

Jerome

[quote=JJSlote]

I don't yet understand why a simple source is unflagged when a TLI is demoted. Perhaps Pierre can tell us, or it's discussed somewhere. For now, I don't see the advantage; that's why I asked in the Manual thread why we would not turn Inheritance On to protect a grid's Source field.

[/quote]

I think it makes sense in an environment where items DON'T share multiple parents. However, I don't like that behaviour ("unflag" demoted items) in a multiple parent and potentially complex source environment -- which is one the beauties of IQ.

[quote=JJSlote]

I completely agree with you.

I know Pierre has reasons for it, and some are very good... It's a question of perspective I believe. However, I came out with a system mixing sources with 2 different fields related by the OR operator. I wrote about that a few times (see Flags for grid visibility - how to approach this?, which you might have seen already)... I would absolutely NOT do things differently now -- there are too many advantages and so few problems --.... except if the field with inheritance (which I call the "grid marker" field) was a system field I didn't have to take care of (a sort of "I am/was displayed in this grid" flag) and was automatically managed (even if partially) by IQ itself...