I think I see what you mean: we would automatically pull the record out
of the collection and display it separately. It could end up being part
of more than one collection. That would give a much more sophisticated
view of the data. Good idea. I was stuck in "one record visible per
collection" mode.
Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> I am going offline for tonight. I'll read the rest of your comment
> tomorrow. Let me answer this one though.
>
> On Jul 12, 2006, at 11:30 PM, Marcel wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by uniquing in this context. Checking to
>> see if an object (say, a given Artist) is anywhere in the diagram
>> isn't suitable.
>
> I think it is.
>
>> Consider Dept and Employee tables, where Dept has n employees and 1
>> boss, all drawn from the Employee table. When I expand the employees
>> relationship, I get a collection of Employee objects including the
>> boss. When I expand the boss relationship, I don't want to point to
>> the same visual part (the collection of Employees) even though the
>> boss is in it.
>
> I don't see a problem with this scenario. Collection and its elements
> can be made separate things visually (and this is what I was trying to
> say in the previous message). I guess I may need to draw a picture in
> Photoshop or something to better illustrate what I'm saying. When you
> expand the boss relationship you point to another employee (who is the
> boss). Employee, not the collection of employees.
>
>> The only alternative I can see to the present setup (which just
>> expands any relationship the user asks to see expanded, but won't
>> expand the same relationship twice) is to refuse to expand
>> relationships which have already been expanded from the other end (ie
>> if the Dept -> Employee relationship has already been expanded,
>> clicking on the Dept relationship in the employee table does nothing).
>
> It can do something visual, such as change the color of the
> relationship arrow and the outline of the target object selected.
>
>> But there is no reason to refuse this: if that's what the user wants
>> to see, why not let them?
>
> Because it would incorrectly represent the graph. It will show
> multiple nodes where there is one. Besides we are not preventing the
> user from seeing the node he wants to see. We are just pointing him to
> the right place, saying "see, it is already opened".
>
> Andrus
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Jul 13 2006 - 00:10:40 EDT