We have a test requirement to verify that only the expected fields appear on a page. I can verify this case as: True, the expected fields appear. But I cannot verify that "only" these fields appear. So the condition is something like:
Verify: Except field[id/name]="test" NO (input OR select) element exists.
- The above will tell me that except the field I am expecting there is no other dropdown/text/checkbox/etc on the page. This is a simple usecase; in real world ofcourse a page will have multiple fields hence I need to veirfy that except these [5] fields no other field exists.
Any idea how to do this in IDE only? Or is there any hack possible to get this verified using IDE only?
You posted no code, so I cannot reply with any code!
The approach you could take is count the number of all fields on a page, and count number of field you are interested in. The two should match.
Related
I'm trying to create filters for a search on an Android app where a specific field in Algolia must exactly match the given String in order to come up as a hit. For example if Algolia has a field like "foo" and I only want to return hits where "foo" is equal to "bar", then I would expect that I would have to use a line of code like this:
query.setFilters("foo: \"bar\"");
Any guesses as to why this isn't working like I see in the examples or how to do so?
Ah, I thought that attributesForFaceting was done by setting what was searchable or not. It was on a different page within the dashboard than I was previously using. Thanks #pixelastic.
I need to add a few fields to a Word 2010 DOTX template which are to be populated automatically with custom content at "run time" when the document is opened in a C# program using Word Interop services. I don't see any way to assign a unique name to "Ask" or "Fill-In" fields when adding them to the template via the QuickParts ribbon-menu option.
When I iterate the document.Fields collection in the C# program, I must know which field I'm referencing, so it can be assigned the correct value.
It seems things have changed between previous versions of Word and Word 2010. So, if you answer please make sure your answer applies to 2010. Don't assume that what used to work in previous versions works in 2010. Much appreciated, since I rarely work with Word and feel like a dolt when trying to figure out the ribbon menuing in 2010.
You are correct in that fields don't necessarily have a built-in way to uniquely distinguish themselves from other field instances (other than its index in the Fields collection). However, you can use the Field.Type property to test for wdFieldAsk or wdFieldFillIn . If this is not narrow enough to ID then you will need to parse your own unique identifier from the Field.Code. For example, you can construct your FILLIN field as:
{ FILLIN "Hello, World!" MYIDENTIFER }
when you iterate through your document.Fields collection just have a test for the identifier being in the string. EDIT: example:
For Each fld In ActiveDocument.Fields
If InStr("CARMODEL", fld.Code) <> 0 Then
''this is the carmodel field
End If
Next
Another alternative - seek your specific field with a Find.Text for "^d MYIDENTIFIER" (where ^d is expression for 'field code')
Let me know if this helps and expand on your question if any gaps.
Am hoping someone with enough insight into the inner workings of Lucene might be able to point me in the right direction =)
I'll skip most of the surrounding irellevant code, and cut right to the chase. I have a Lucene index, to which I am adding the following field to the index (variables replaced by their literal values):
document.Add( new Field("Typenummer", "E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7",
Field.Store.YES , Field.Index.UN_TOKENIZED));
Later, when I search my index (using other types of queries), I am able to verify that this field does indeed appear in my index - like when looping through all Fields returned by Document.GetFields()
Field: Typenummer, Value: E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7
So far so good :-)
Now the real problem is - why can I not use a TermQuery to search against this value and actually get a result.
This code produces 0 hits:
// Returns 0 hits
bq.Add( new TermQuery( new Term( "Typenummer",
"E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7" ) ), BooleanClause.Occur.MUST );
But if I switch this to a WildcardQuery (with no wildcards), I get the 1 hit I expect.
// returns the 1 hit I expect
bq.Add( new WildcardQuery( new Term( "Typenummer",
"E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7" ) ), BooleanClause.Occur.MUST );
I've checked field lengths, I've checked that I am using the same Analyzer and so on and I am still on square 1 as to why this is.
Can anyone point me in a direction I should be looking?
I finally figured out what was going on. I'm expanding the tags for this question as it, much to my surprise, actually turned out to be an issue with the CMS this particular problem exists in. In summary, the problem came down to this:
The field is stored UN_TOKENIZED, meaning Lucene will store it excactly "as-is"
The BooleanQuery I pasted snippets from gets sent to the Sitecore SearchManager inside a PreparedQuery wrapper
The behaviour I expected from this was, that my query (having already been prepared) would go - unaltered - to the Lucene API
Turns out I was wrong. It passes through a RewriteQuery method that copies my entire set of nested queries as-is, with one exception - all the Term arguments are passed through a LowercaseStrategy()
As I indexed an UPPERCASE Term (UN_TOKENIZED), and Sitecore changes my PreparedQuery to lowercase - 0 results are returned
Am not going to start an argument of whether this is "by design" or "by design flaw" implementation of the Lucene Wrapper API - I'll just note that rewriting my query when using the PreparedQuery overload is... to me... unexpected ;-)
Further teachings from this; storing the field as TOKENIZED will eliminate this problem too, as the StandardAnalyzer by default will lowercase all tokens.
I have the following code:
$("#auto").autocomplete({
source: "js/search.php",
minLength: "3" });
This code is assign to an input text box where i type a name and after 3 letters it should return the ones that have similar letters. For my case it is returning all values, even those not related to the 3 letters already typed. My question is:
How to send my search.php file the value inside the input so it should know what to search for. For the moment it searches for everything. I checked the value that was going to php and it was empty. Since the query to mysql uses LIKE '%VARIABLE%' and the variable is empty it searches for '%%' which is all cases.
How can i send the correct informacion from JS to PHP with the simplest form.
Here is the explanation :
http://www.simonbattersby.com/blog/jquery-ui-autocomplete-with-a-remote-database-and-php/
Regards
Friends,
I'm facing another challenge in APEX and I hope you can help.
I have created a tree using the method described in John & Scott's superb book, "Pro Application Express" whereby the page link is stored in a table. Below is an example:
go to a page passing some parameters
f?p=&APP_ID.:3:&SESSION.::::P3_IDENTIFIER,P3_FAMILY_NAME:&P2_IDENTIFIER.,&P2_FAMILY_NAME.
When the page is run this works as expected. I can expand the tree and navigate to the page passing parameters if required.
However when I turned on session state protection these "hand crafted" links stopped working. Which I expected because the link contains no checksum.
After some investigation I see I have to use APEX_UTIL.PREPARE_URL to generate the URL with a checksum. Unfortunately this is where I run into problems. I can't seem to be able to pass the parameters values to the calling page.
The original tree query was:
select "IDENTIFIER" id,
"PARENT_IDENTIFIER" pid,
"TITLE" name,
"LINK" link,
null a1,
null a2
from <some table>
I then changed this to use APEX_UTIL.PREPARE_URL:
....
APEX_UTIL.PREPARE_URL('f?p='||:APP_ID||':3:'||:APP_SESSION||'::::P3_IDENTIFIER,P3_FAMILY_NAME:&P2_IDENTIFIER.,&P2_FAMILY_NAME.') link,
...
and this works, the page is called and I can see the values of the parameters passed. But I can't use this method as it is restricted to the one page!
Finally I tried storing the page number, parameters and parameter values in different columns of the table that the tree is based on and then bring them together:
...
APEX_UTIL.PREPARE_URL('f?p='||:APP_ID||':'||navigate_to_page||':'||:APP_SESSION||'::::'||parameters||':'||parameter_values) link,
...
Where:
navigate to page has the value of: 3
parameters has the value of: P3_IDENTIFIER,P3_FAMILY_NAME
parameter_values has the values of: &P2_IDENTIFIER.,&P2_FAMILY_NAME.
This now calls the page, but the parameter values have become literals. so where I'm expecting an identifier I see &P2_IDENTIFIER and ditto for family name.
What am I doing wrong? How can I pass values to my called page using apex_util_prepare_url?
In case of need, my environment details are: Apex 3.2.1, Oracle Application Server 10.1.2.3. Oracle Database 10.2.0.3
Thanks in advance for any help you may be able to provide.
I think you'll need to resolve those variables, using the v() function:
APEX_UTIL.PREPARE_URL('f?p='||:APP_ID
||':'||navigate_to_page
||':'||:APP_SESSION
||'::::'||parameters
||':'||v('P2_IDENTIFIER')||','||v('P2_FAMILY_NAME')) link,
On a side note, you might need to be careful about P2_FAMILY_NAME since it's being used in the url; it sounds like a plain text field which contains user-entered data?