I am having difficulty with a conditional format of a form. I have three conditions and two work.
Conditions 2 & 3 work fine. Condition 1 is another story. I have added condition one after I knew 2 & 3 were working. I basically added a 3rd condition then swapped 1 for 3 out of fear that after condition one was met the conditions stopped. Now condition 1 is the primary. What have I done wrong for condition 1 not to show?
Related
I have Student Attendance information Date-wise as if Attended on a particular day then the value is 0, if not then 1. I want to have a running sum that shows consecutively how many days a student has missed. So the running sum has to reset when it encounters 0. How I can achieve this in Tableau.
After so many trial and errors I finally got to this expression and it seems to be working fine after testing.
IF ATTR([Attended]) != 0
THEN IF FIRST() = 0 # This IF is basically for the first value to be displayed as 1 instead of 2 (1 + 1)
THEN 1
ELSE SUM([Attended])+PREVIOUS_VALUE(SUM([Attended]))
END
ELSE SUM([Attended])-SUM([Attended]) # Reset on 0
END
There might be a simpler logic, but this is working for me.
Hope it works for others too(make sure to delete the Comments in the expression if used in Tableau!!!)
I am trying to write a Siddhi query to detect if an event didn't happen prior to another within a time limit. The query I have to detect if 'X' didn't ever happen prior to 'Y' in the entire life of the siddhi application is:
from stream[value == 'Y']
and not stream[value == 'X']
I assumed adding a time constraint would work:
from stream[value == 'Y']
and not stream[value == 'X'] for 5 min
However, the 'for' statement never has any effect that I can see. This query is still triggered whether 'X' was 4 minutes ago or 6 minutes ago. I understand that a similar effect can be achieved by checking if 'Y' comes after 'X' within a time limit, but for my purposes I need to know the other way around.
Is this possible with Siddhi? If so can someone please provide a sample query that could achieve this?
Based on your comment I am composing below answer.
Sequence construct in Siddhi will guarantee that no one can enter the state flow at a random point. As an example let's take below sample sequence query.
from every e1=InputStream[state='X'], e2=InputStream[state'Y']
select e1.state as initialState, e2.state as finalState
insert into NextStream;
So in here we are mandating X followed by a consecutive Y. If Y occurs before X sequence construct will handle that and discard Y. So whatever goes into NextStream is guaranteed to satisfy x -> Y state transition.
More relaxed construct of sequence is pattern. It is same as sequence while relaxing the consecutive arrival requirement. Hope this helps!!
I have a feeling there may not be an easy answer to this question.
Lets assume this is my decision table, which operates on an object instance called "input".
CONDITION CONDITION ACTION
a == $param b != $param input.setC($param)
1 5 11
1 6 11
My case is that if a is not 1, and b is not in (5,6) then set c to 11.
However, if b is 6, the first rule will still fire since b is not 5, thus setting c to 11.
I would like to keep the organization of the columns without having to put multiple values in a column.
QUESTION: Is there some sort of header I can use which basically turns the decision table into a single rule, where b will not be in any of the rows where a is 1? Or some alternative method?
I am tempted to go with the negation of the rule:
CONDITION CONDITION ACTION
a == $param b == $param input.setC($param)
1 1 11
1 2 11
1 3 11
1 4 11
1 7 11
1 8 11
There are way more in this table and this makes it more difficult to maintain.
If you are using XLS decision table, then a similar to this one should work.
If you are familiar with drools or jbpm workbench I can provide you also solution based on Guided Decision Tables.
Hope this helps and let me know.
I want to search 3 different indices at once, breaking out their results into 3 separate sections.
Above these 3 sections though, I want to display a 4th section with a single result row, and this section will be titled "Best Result".
It should take the best result of the 3 indices that most perfectly matches.
Does anyone know how I can achieve this? Thanks!
By design, when the ranking of each index is properly set (both attributeToIndex, and customRanking settings filled), the Algolia engine returns the most relevant et popular results for each new search request. First the one without typos and with perfect matches, then the others...
Which mean that if you want to display all the top results on a single page, you only need to take the N first result of each index.
Then it's just a matter of display. Like on the following websites, you can imagine to display those results into multiple columns:
http://telly.com/
Prototype built using the TED API
Feel free to look at tips about the best way to display result hits in multiple columns using Algolia and Bootstrap 3
Beside that you can also consider passing the getRankingInfo=1 parameter with your search query, and filter the results displayed accordingly to the matching info returned for each hit within the _rankingInfo property.
firstMatchedWord: 2000
geoDistance: 0
geoPrecision: 1
nbExactWords: 2
nbTypos: 0
proximityDistance: 1
userScore: 9499
words: 2
I have created a multilevel list for being able to reference to table rows in a word document. Multilevel list thread
With the multilevel list I struggle to skip numbers. The table numbering is divided into two levels. NNN and NNNL, where N: Number and L:Letter.
Example:
1. Header 1
101
101a
2. Header 2
201a
The numbering below header 1 works fine, but header 2 does NOT work.
The numbering are used for clauses in a document, so in case a clause is divided into different conditions, the class NNNL is used. However, as it is now, it needs the NNN for create NNNL.
I have tried using 'Set numbering value' - 'Continue from previous list' - 'Advance value (skip numbers)', following this solution suggestion, but following this guide still results in the addition of a level NNN before (see below for examplification).
2. Header 2
201 <- This is added
201a
Can't I skip a numbering value of a list level above the item I wish to change?
Edited:
Also, when having a subheader I face issues. If the first clause after a subheader is divided into subclauses, I get
101
1.1 subheader
101a
What I want is this
101
1.1 subheader
102a
I have uploaded a word-file I have uploaded a word-document here which shows the issue.
Set both Level 2 and Level 3 to restart after Level 1 (in the dialog box described in the Answer of first post to which you link). This way you can leave out Level 2 and Level 3 will still restart.