[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [lmi] product editor feedback

From: Boutin, Wendy
Subject: RE: [lmi] product editor feedback
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:49:35 -0400

Evgeniy Tarassov wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Wendy Boutin <address@hidden> wrote:
> Wendy, thank you very much for the detailed report on the changes!
> Below are notes for some of the issues you have pointed out. The
> issues not yet fixed are omitted.
> > database
> >  - legend at top is in a large font, causing text 
> truncation (tier, too)
> Font is set to be bold normal size. 

There's consensus here that the right number of distinct fonts 
for a dialog is one. We've avoided boldface everywhere else, and 
would rather avoid it here, too.

In the legacy system, we wrapped instead of truncating. Example:
  Mortality | SubstdTblMult

Putting it this way:

(1) "Do you like wrapping better than trunca"

(2) "Do you like wrapping better than

> The legend is set to have a
> tooltip which should be shown as a normal tooltip. Legend text could
> be (still) truncated if it is long enough. do you think that it is
> critical to have legend not truncated, or maybe a tooltip is enough to
> let the user get the whole description if he needs it?

We'd like to avoid using tooltips.
> >  - why the extra '[+]' in top level node descriptions?
> What do you think would be the best way to emphasize the fact that the
> currently selected item in the tree (on the left) is a "category"? Now
> after you have pointed it out I think that maybe its not even needed
> since for a category everything is grayed out. The prefix "[+]" is
> removed.

That looks much better. Thank you.

> >  - checkboxes *look* enabled when top level node is selected
> This is a bug in WX. As soon as the corresponding path makes it into
> wx HEAD it will be available.

Upgrading wx may be out of our immediate scope right now because of
other work that still remains. There's a suggestion below that may
help solve this particular problem. I'm not ruling out a wx upgrade,
but if we can avoid adding that right now, than that's better for us.
> >  - can floating-point formats be changed?
> >      database seems to use a six-digit default, but tier does not
> Changed to value_cast default behavior.

I observe the change, however I have difficulty inputting the largest
number. I tried to paste the largest value in a field, but when I save
it, then reopen it, I get this messagebox:

Assertion '(.999 * DBL_MAX) < limits_.back()' failed.
[file c:/opt/lmi/src/lmi/stratified_charges.cpp, line 133]


> >  - insufficient space for UWBasis values as column or row headers
> A patch was committed into WX so this should not be a problem with the
> latest WX.
> >  - using 'Loads | PremTaxRate' and changing:
> >      'X axis' to [blank]
> >      'Y axis' to 'State'
> >     should save the change after navigating to another 
> field, but doesn't;
> >     'File | Save' doesn't save the change either
> >     similar fields behave the same way
> Fixed. Now navigating back to the same field restores its axis
> selection. About saving axis selection: AFAIK it is not stored along
> with the document data (is it?) in the file. 

It should not be saved in the file.

> The axis selection is a
> property of the current view (presenting the data), not the data
> itself. It could be added into the file, but it will mix the data with
> its visual representation, personally, i don't think it is right. Do
> you think it should be done nevertheless? 

We agree: it's not right to add this to the file.

> Currently when a user opens
> a "session" (opening a window in the program, which shows the data)
> the selection will persist, but as soon as the "session" is over (the
> window is closed), the selection is gone.

Then is it the case that there's no way to save the selections? I don't
like that I can change my axes, save the file, reopen it and see the axes 
rearranged in the order that they're listed in the GUI. 

> >  - all top level nodes should have values of zero
> >     e.g., loading a proprietary product displayed 'PremTaxTable' value
> > in 'Tables' grid
> I think one of the changes done to the code should have fixed this
> issue already. I can't reproduce this behavior, but if it ever
> occurred before it should be now impossible (due to the code changes
> made).

I am using cvs HEAD code as of today and can still observe my original
problem with a proprietary product. It would be better not to show 
anything except the legend for non-leaf nodes. That might also obviate 
the issue (above) of axis-checkbox enablement. (Maybe that's part of the 
reason why ihs works this way.)
> >  - occasionally encountered this problem, but more consistently with a
> >     proprietary product:
> > File | Open | sample.db4
> >
> > ---------------------------
> > Error
> > ---------------------------
> > Trying to index database item with key 66677016 past end of data.
> > [file c:/opt/lmi/src/lmi/ihs_dbvalue.cpp, line 337]
> Fixed this issue. The top level nodes now are not used at all, which
> seemed to cause problems before. This should not have any impact on
> the visual part of the program.

Hmm, using my same steps as above, I now get this messagebox: 

Assertion 'a_idx[j] < axis_lengths[j]' failed.
[file c:/opt/lmi/src/lmi/ihs_dbvalue.cpp, line 325]

> > tier
> >  - can DBL_MAX be formatted as, say, "MAXIMUM"?
> Yes. It should be easy to implement. What do you think should be
> accepted from the user as the keyword? Does it has to be "MAXIMUM"
> only? Case (in)sensitive? Should it accept an abbreviation like "MAX"?

I think Greg has better insight with this one, so I'll defer your
questions to him.

> > File | New | Tier
> > File | Save as | ABC.tir
> > results in this:
> >
> > ---------------------------
> > Stop the current operation and attempt to resume safely?
> > ---------------------------
> > Assertion '(.999 * DBL_MAX) < limits_.back()' failed.
> > [file c:/opt/lmi/src/lmi/stratified_charges.cpp, line 139]
> Fixed. The cause is the same as for the database part - top level
> nodes can not be manipulated.

I can still reproduce it with cvs HEAD. Is it possible your fixes
are in separate patches that Greg's reviewing or maybe a different
branch that I should be using?

This e-mail transmission may contain information that is 
proprietary, privileged and/or confidential and is 
intended exclusively for the person(s) to whom it is 
addressed. Any use, copying, retention or disclosure by 
any person other than the intended recipient or the 
intended recipient's designees is strictly prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient or their designee, 
please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and 
delete all copies.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]