LAE

Note: This was originally posted by an inactive account. Content was preserved by moving under an admin account.

Originally posted by: mwillett

I have been playing around with the charts of late (and getting some good outcomes from using these) but some questions remain open for me.

1 - when I link up the pins for these, it seems difficult to align these so that the line between the nodes is straight (i.e, the connections in the box don't line up across the page). I'm using gridlines but that makes no difference - am I missing something here?

2 - linked to appearance is another question. In some composites, I have 2 or 3 different charts showing different things. I want to increase the size of these charts so they take more of the screen (to show others) but trying to re-size these so they are all a constant dimension is difficult and seems to require trial and error. Is there a better way?

3 - For a composite, that has 2-3 charts inside, I want to present one of these as the "icon" for the composite. It is possible to pick but names to select are the same for the same chart type, how do I know, other than trial and error, that I'm picking the right chart to be the composite icon?

4 - Lastly, if I do an "undo delete" in the graph, it seems to reset all the composite sizes etc. So if, per #2, I've just got these all in the right place and of the right size, all that work gets undone.

Thanks in advance.

Note: This was originally posted by an inactive account. Content was preserved by moving under an admin account.

Originally posted by: Tim Meagher

Hi Mike,

1. The pins will always align correctly prior to resizing of the visualizing node (either a charting node, or composite containing the charting node with DisplayImage set). However, once this has been resized, then it won't line up with the output pins. This is a known issue that will be fixed in a future maintenance release.
   
   
2. The resizing is done such that the images maintain their aspect ratio. Assuming that the charts are all the same size, this should be a case of lining them up and resizing until they are all the same size.
   
   It is a bit trial and error-like though.
   
   I think that addressing issue 1 will probably lead to a fix for this issue as well. If the fix for the first issue doesn't resolve this directly, I'm wondering if something like a "snap to grid" functionality would be useful here?
   
   If so, I can raise this as an enhancement request for you. We would probably still need to work out some details - I assume that "snap to grid" would be an option in the display mode preferences, but how this interacts with the aspect ratio of the image would be another thing to solve.
   
   However this is probably related to the first point, where we want the resize to align in such a way that input & output pins will be able to line up to the BRE grid. It might be that we don't require explicit "snap to grid" behavior.
   
   
3. The choice of which charting images to display in the DisplayImage parameter is based on the node names.
   
   So, say you have a composite "Comp", containing 3 bar chart nodes, if you simply change the names of the nodes to "Bar 1", "Bar 2", "Bar 3", then you should easily be able to identify which of the charting nodes you are going to display in the DisplayImage in "Comp". Obviously, more sensible names should be chosen than "Bar 1", "Bar 2", "Bar 3" depending on the purpose of the different charts.
   
   
4. From what I am seeing, it also will clear the status of any visualizer nodes, meaning the image no longer displays and you will need to run the charting node again. Even after this, the image is not sized as per the original resizing - rather it is left as the default size. I have raised these issues as bugs in our system and we will look into fixing this in coming releases.

Regards,
Tim.

Note: This was originally posted by an inactive account. Content was preserved by moving under an admin account.

Originally posted by: mwillett

Thanks Tim,

Thanks for comment on #3 and I think I can only comment further on the "snap to grid" idea.

If you are thinking about this, and assuming it lines up the pins ok, then how about something similar to the way Access does it.

In this case, there are options to select nodes (controls in Access speak), and then size them to the largest, shortest, narrowest, widest. Similarly, there is an option to align these left, right, top, bottom. When I use Access I always find these very useful to getting a good look and feel on a form.

Very keen to see these come through in a new release, so please keep me posted.

Mike

Note: This was originally posted by an inactive account. Content was preserved by moving under an admin account.

Originally posted by: Tim Meagher

Hey,

Interesting idea about the largest, shortest, narrowest & widest...

I must admit, my knowledge of Access isn't great (and probably years out of date)...
Is it the case that largest & shortest basically height based size operations, while narrowest & widest are basically width based size operations?

I had already submitted an enhancement request for "Align" and "Distribute" operations similar to that which is present in MS Excel, Powerpoint, etc (the thought of node alignment triggered that idea for me as well).

I can update this enhancement request with the idea to add the size-based operations you mentioned in addition to the position-based operations of alignment & distribution.

There has probably always been a use for the position-based operations. However, with the introduction of in-flow reporting, I think the graphical layout of nodes on the canvas is now of a higher importance than previously. The size based operations would have been pointless prior to inflow reporting, since nodes were always of the same size.

These enhancement requests will go into the pool for triage. Therefore, I can't say when they would make it into a release. In saying that, I can certainly see a use for them.