Re: Antw: New gda-report's DTD

[Carlos Perelló Marín <carlos hispalinux es>]

Gerhard Dieringer escribió:

[...]

> I propose the following changes:
> we should allow more than one pageheader/footer. Then we can define (for example) one for even and one for odd pages.
> 
> <!ELEMENT report (reportheader?, pageheader*, reportdata?,
>                                  pagefooter*, reportfooter?)>
> 
> Also the list of attributes should be changed
> 
> <!ATTLIST pageheader [or pagefooter]
>   height        NMTOKEN   #REQUIRED
>   printonfirst  (yes|no)   "yes"
>   printonlast  (yes|no)   "yes"
>   printinside  (yes|no)   "yes"
>   printoneven  (yes|no)   "yes"
>   printonodd (yes|no) "yes"
> >
> 
> or alternatively
> 
> <!ENTITY % positionfrequency "first|inside|last|firstandinside|insideandlast|firstandlast|all">
> <!ENTITY % pagenumfrequency "even|odd|all">
> 
> <!ATTLIST pageheader  [or pagefooter]
>   height        NMTOKEN   #REQUIRED
>   positionfrequency  (%positionfrequency;)   "all"
>   pagenumfrequency (%numberfrequency;)    "all"
>  >
> 
> <!ATTLIST groupheader [or groupfooter]
>   height        NMTOKEN   #REQUIRED
>   newpage       (yes|no)  "no"
>   keeptogether (yes|no) "yes"
> >

But, then if you want print to headers in the same page?

> 
> >  "bound" label thus might need two possible values
> >     a) A short label, often for use in headers
> >     b) A long label, often for use to left/right
> >     These could even default to stuff in metadata dictionaries.
> 
> I wouldn't consider a label, that is found in the metadata dictionaries call a 'label', but a repfield of it's own. But maybe I'm wrong.


Well, i think that a "repfield" should have a label.

> 
> > Why do programmers need to leave a lot of this undefined?  Because the
> > report should be sensitive to defaults set by the user at runtime.
> > One might be half blind, and need larger fonts, etc, by default.
> >
> > Similarly in reporting sections, certain elements are often set together
> > and designed to be moved/resized as a unit.  The
> >
> >     Unit0Label      Unit1Label
> >     Lbl0:Data0      Lbl3:Data3Data3Data3Data3Data3Data3Data3Data3
> >     Lbl1:Data1           Data3Data3Data3Data3
> >     Lbl2:Data2      Lbl4:Data4
> >
> > Lbl0-2 and Data0-2 should be aligned the same, and the left origin
> > for the labels is typically the left origin of the unit as a whole.
> >
> > Again, if this is a programmer-used DTD, it might be nice to indicate
> > it as a symbol "monospaced" "variable_width" and sizes of fonts relative
> > to those in various config files: "+0", "-2" etc.
> >
> > However, the more I think about this, the more I think that looking at
> > glade, libglade and libxml is a good idea.  The report should be
> > capable of being rendered for screen (with resizeable grid columns,
> > explodable trees) or for print (where everything is displayed fully).
> > This implies ONE report spec and TWO renderings.  I am reminded of
> > the idea associated with libglade/libxml of using glade to generate
> > the first cut of the UI, with associated events/signals, but the
> > C program binds the UI at runtime.  Anybody need a rundown on the
> > details of this?  I can give pointers to a tutorial at IBM Developer
> > Works if needed.
> 
> IMO this DTD describes a report template, that is fed into some db-engine, that drops all the query tags, replaces the repfield tags by some value tags
> and outputs a new XML doc, with a very similar DTD. This new doc is finally rendered.

Well, "" it is not correct, The correct expresion should be: "with this
DTD"

> 
> But I'm not the original author of this, I just jumped into the boat a few days before you.

An only a few days before me :-D

I think that yours opinios are equal or even better than my opinions.

> 
> > I'll have more to say next week about group headers/footers, and the
> > possible need for them to run their own query, this query having
> > parameters
> > bound to values passed down from the main query, and thus avoiding
> >HUGE joins in the main query.
> 
> If you are speeking about my proposal, you might have noticed, that the group headers/footers already do have their own queries.
> 
> Gerhard
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-db-list mailing list
> gnome-db-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list

-- 
Carlos Perelló Marín
carlos@hispalinux.es
http://TorresQuevedo.hispalinux.es
http://nulies.hispalinux.es
http://www.Hispalinux.es
Valencia - España