I'm using a virtual document structure generated by a script to create a document from EA, and I'm trying to use the same template fragment several times with different elements and different headings.
For example, I have an element which describes the input data to one program, and the output data to another program, so I can't really store the information in the element I'm documenting.
Where it is the input, I want one heading (and similar references within the template), and where it is output I want different values for the headings.
I've tried using the ReportTitle tagged value in the individual <model document> element, but this appears to be ignored and only the <report package> value is used throughout (which makes me wonder why they are there in the first place).
While I could create multiple templates all referring to the same fragment and hard-code the different headings, but that is messy, and as I already have fragments within fragments so it could result in a lot of almost identical templates and fragments. Variables that I can set for each <model document> would be much preferable.
Has anyone got a better approach than this? Thanks!
I don't think there's an easy solution.
If there is a way to determine based on the element, package, or diagram ID whether you should use one title or the other then you could use a script or SQL fragment to return the correct title.
If that is not the case I guess the only possibility is to hardcode the different titles in your templates.
In order to avoid too much duplication you could create a template with only the title and use that on a model document. Since you are generating the modeldocuments by a script anyway that doesn't cost any user time.
Related
We regularly need to perform a handful of relatively simple tests against a bunch of MS Word documents. As these checks are currently done manually, I am striving for a way to automate this. For example:
Check if every page actually has a page number and verify that it is correct.
Verify that a version identifier in the page header is identical across all pages.
Check if the document has a table of contents.
Check if the document has a table of figures.
Check if every figure has a caption.
et cetera. Is this reasonably feasible using PowerShell in conjunction with a Word API?
Powershell can access Word via its object model/Interop (on Windows, at any rate) and AIUI can also work with the Office Open XML OOXML) API, so really you should be able to write any checks you want on the document content. What is slightly less obvious is how you verify that the document content will result in a particular "printed appearance". I'm going to start with some comments on the details first.
Just bear in mind that in the following notes I'm just pointing out a few things that you might have to deal with. If you're examining documents produced by an organisation where people are already broadly speaking following the same standards, it may be easier.
Of the 5 examples you give, without checking the details I couldn't say exactly how you would do them, and there could be difficulties with all of them, but for example
Check if every page actually has a page number and verify that it is correct.
Difficult using either OOXML or the object model, because what you would really be checking is that the header for a particular section had a visible { PAGE } field code. Because that field code might be nested inside other fields that say "if don't display this field code", it's not so easy to be sure that there would be a page number.
Which is what I mean by checking the document's "printed appearance" - if, for example, you can use the object model to print to PDF and have some mechanism that lets PS inspect the PDF's content, that might be a better approach.
Verify that a version identifier in the page header is identical across all pages.
Similar problem to the above, IMO. It depends partly on how the version identifier might be inserted. Is it just a piece of text? Could it be constructed from a number of fields? Might it reference Document Properties or Variables, or Custom XML content?
Check if the document has a table of contents.
Perhaps enough to look for a TOC field that does not have certain options, such as a \c option that a Table of Figures would contain.
Check if the document has a table of figures.
Perhaps enough to check for a TOC field that does have a \c option, perhaps with a specific parameter such as "Figure"
Check if every figure has a caption.
Not sure that you can tell whether a particular image is "a Figure". But if you mean "verify that every graphic object has a caption", you could probably iterate through the inline and floating graphics in the document and verify that there was something that looked like a Word standard caption paragraph within a certain distance of that object. Word has two standard field code patterns for captions AFAIK (one where the chapter number is included and one where it isn't), so you could look for those. You could measure a distance between the image and the caption by ensuring that they were no more than a predefined number of paragraphs apart, or in the case of a floating image, perhaps that the paragraph anchoring the image was no more than so many paragraphs away from the caption.
A couple of more general problems that you might have to deal with:
- just because a document contains a certain feature, such as a ToC field, does not mean that it is visible. A TOC field might have been formatted as not visible. Even harder to detect, it could have been formatted as colored white.
- change tracking. You might have to use the Word object model to "accept changes" before checking whether any given feature is actually there or not. Unless you can find existing code that would help you do that using the OOXML representation of the document, that's probably a strong case for doing checks via the object model.
Some final observations
for future checks, perhaps worth noting that in principle you could create a "DocumentInspector" that users could call from Word BackStage to perform checks on a document. Not sure you can force users to run it, or that you could create it in PS, but perhaps a useful tool.
longer term, if you are doing a very large number of checks, perhaps worth considering whether you could train a ML model to try to detect problems.
Is there a way to dynamically create tables in wiki?
Usecase : I'm trying to mimic similar to soap sonar in fitnesse. SOAP SOANR 1. Once we import the wsdl, soap sonar generates inputs for operations in wsdl. 2. Choose a operation, Enter input and then execute the operation. 3. In case of arrays, we can select size of array and enter values in respective array.
Fitnesse 1. I'm able to achieve point 1 using soapui jars. 2. This i'm able to achieve using xmlhttptest fixture
I'm stuck in 3rd point. Is there a way i can do this in fitnesse? (My idea is from point 1, i can get sample input for each operation, from which i will get to know that there are arrays/complex types present in input.xml but how do we represent this in wiki dynamically?
Thanks in advance
What I've done in the past is use ListFixture (and MapFixture) to dynamically fill a List (and Map/Hashes for each element's properties) and then use these as input values to a XmlHttpTest's feature to create the body to be sent using a FreeMarker template (which allows iteration over a list, which I use to create elements in the array based on the list).
But this gets quite complex quickly. Is that level of flexibility truly required? I found that quite often hard coding the number of elements in arrays/lists in the wiki is simpler to do and makes the test far easier to understand/maintain.
I most cases I prefer to create a script (or scenario) with the right number of elements for the test case(s) in with the request in the wiki page. The use of scenarios allows me to test with different values (but the same number of elements). Another element count gets its own script/scenario.
Being able to dynamically change the number of elements is only worthwhile if you need to test for many different counts, otherwise the added complexity of dynamically creating the body is just not worth it.
I am working on Access 2007. I have a table with some fields in it. I had created a form from the table and one of the fields of the table is a concatenation of 2 fields from the same table.
There are 2 fields OppNo and Material in the table. I had created a form with these (and others in the table) fields. There is another field OppMat which is blank in the table. However, I had got the data into OppMat field populated as a concatenation of OppNo and Material fields in the form. I am now looking at having the table updated with the data of OppMat from the form to the same corresponding field in the table.
Kindly advise as how I could achieve this.
Thanks and regards,
This might be possible if these cases are met:
The field OppMat ALWAYS has the same structure and you can assure that it does.
Users will not be able or very unlikely to deviate from this structure.
Notably you should use something like Left(), Right(), Mid() and so on. Whatever works best for your structure. You can use the string modifiers: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd789093.aspx
On the other hand I must admit that I am sceptical if your solutions is the best. Here are my reasons:
Users are unpredictable and will continously deviate from your intended way to use the application.
Using the string functions and fixating on one structure makes your code construction inflexible, hard to maintain if changes occur and prone to errors.
The alternatives seem to be better with little drawback.
My suggestions for alternatives:
Use one textbox for each field so that you have two textboxes. You can even position them that way that it almost looks like it is continous text. But not too much otherwise the user will beconfused.
You can add a label that shows your concatenated fields. But for input you use two different textboxes.
Cheers!
!!! UPDATED !!!
We have spreadsheets of complex product data coming in from multiple sources (internal, customers, vendors).
Since the authorship is so diverse, it's impractical to try governing formatting details such as column order and the number of header-rows.
These CSV spreadsheets will be uploaded to our DB via an existing form.
(My first Zend_Form ... I'm almost done with it)
The user needs to see a sample from a given spreadsheet so they can Map the columns and start-row.
To achieve that, I need to generate an html table of that dynamic content, and weave the form elements in and around the table data.
The user would select which values are to be found in each column, and identify the first row of data (after any header rows).
CLICK HERE to see an example.
(NOTE: Most of my work here is under an NDA, so contrived examples is the best we can get :)
In this example, I'd expect the output to be:
_POST('first_row'=>2, 'column0'=>'mi', 'column1'=>'lName', 'column2'=>'fName', 'column3'=>'gender')
With all those scpecifics mapped/defined, the uploaded spreadsheet can then be parsed and accurate data can be added to the product_history database.
Is ZF a good tool for this particular problem, or should I just write something from scratch?
How would you aproach this?
I am finally JUST BARELY starting to get this ZF stuff straight in my head, and this one has got me totally lost :)
Any and All advice appreciated.
~ Mo
I think in your case, using Zend_Form would be helpful for this situation.
The tricky part to it is of course that your forms are going to be largely dynamically generated on-the-fly based on the header and first row content of the CSV file.
Whether you used Zend_Form, or pure PHP, or some other solution, a lot of what you will be doing is the same (analyzing the CSV, providing dynamic inputs based on the CSV, and then error checking the selections). I think using Zend_Form has the advantage of making something like this very cleanly.
Given Zend_Form's nature, e.g. how it validates existing forms based on the elements added to the Zend_Form itself, you need to take a special approach with the form. Basically, after the user uploads the CSV once, you will create a Zend_Form object based on the number of columns, their positions in the CSV, and the name of the column.
Since you don't want to bother the user to upload the CSV multiple times if they make incorrect selections, I would parse the CSV into some sort of structure, maybe a simple object or array, and then build your Zend_Form based on that data. This way, you can save that structure to the session, so you can continue to regenerate the form based on the parsed data without having to read the file each time. This is because the main challenge with Zend_Form and dynamic forms, is that not only does the form need all of the elements and their properties when you want to display the form, but they are also required in order to validate the form and re-display the validated form.
I remember seeing this functionality many years ago in a PHP script, which I found is still available. Perhaps you could look at it for ideas. I won't post the link here since the screenshots and script are mostly adult website related and the site is NSFW for the most part, but it is called TGPX by JMBSoft. The 7th of the 8th screenshot on the main product page shows the import process where it lets the user map fields to data, exactly what you are doing.
Hope my advice is helpful, feel free to comment with any questions.
I have a situation where we have a base recordset with about one hundred thousand records. And, we are creating a separate application that shares some of the dataset, but not most, so we are creating a detail table that has a one to one relationship with the original table. What I want to do is pull the existing information from the original table and display it as read only, but I want the fields in the detail table to be writeable.
I've started by creating a listing with the contents of the original table, I want the user to be able to seemlessly hit "edit" by an entry and be taken to the form to create the detail record, click save, and have it update, or create the record.
So, what is the best way to do this?
This question is old, but in order to help future searchers...
Including a related table in a form is handled automatically if your DBIx::Class result sources are correctly setup. A related table can be pulled into the form by simply defining a compound field using the relationship name of the other field and defining subfields with the names of the columns in the related table.
See: HTML::FormHandler::Manual::Fields
And: HTML::FormHandler::Manual::Database
This isn't a real answer, in that I can't really provide you with a solution, but I can hopefully provide you with somewhere to start. I think you need to define a form in HTML::FormHandler which represents a single row from your detail table, then build your read-only form from multiple instances of single-row form. This article describes the problem and a partial solution much better than I have:
http://catdev.blogspot.com/2009/05/defining-form-processing-problem.html
I'm fairly new to Perl and HTML::FormHandler, and there's a good chance that there is a better way of doing this. It's a problem that I have solved 'manually' in PHP before, but one which I am sure I will come across in Perl.