Table UI Design

[Former Member]

Hi,

What I want to acheive right now is something like this..

For every row in Column 1 i need multiple rows in the remaining columns. Something corresponding to the following context node {Please ignore the dots(.) they're substitutes for blank spaces, for formatting }

Context

|

---

Table (NODE)

...

...|-OuterAttr1 (Attribute)

...|----InnerNode (NODE)

......|-InnerAttr1 (Attribute)

......|-InnerAttr2 (Attribute)

......|-InnerAttr3 (Attribute)

Is there something like a ROWSPAN that I can set for the 1st column? And even then the problem is that the number of rows corresponding to that is dynamic.

OR

Alternatively is there anyway to embed a Table( or a Container Element such as Group) into the 2nd column of the Outer Table?

The second alternative is very lucrative.

Regards,

Ashish.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Ashish

The table control as far as I know does not give these kinds of functionalities. Or we should wait for Armin to respond .

But you could achieve something like this

Column1 |

-

---

Master

-

---

Column2| Column3 | Column4

-

---

Detail1 Detail1 Detail1

Detail2 Detail2 Detail2

===================================

Column1 |

-

---

Master2

-

---

Column2| Column3 | Column4

-

---

Detail1 Detail1 Detail1

Detail2 Detail2 Detail2

===================================

What you could do is generate tables dynamically on the fly ,I assume that you have two kinds of data here master and detail and you want the master to be shown first and then the set of detail. For every master record generate a table dynamically with a single row and bind it to the record. Remove your footer.

And for a group of detail records generate a table dynamically with and bind to the detail records. Remove the footer. You can use the invisble UI element to achieve some padding at the start

Regards

Pran

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Pran,

Your reply is helpful, but my requirements need me to show all the "detail data" (the relationship isn't actually master-detail as far as the user/client is concerned) as well... the user should not have to click every time he wants to see the details.(which is why i had asked for countainer elemts as cell editors)

If you can come up with something for that.

Thanks & Regards,

Ashish

[Former Member]

Hi,

1. Create "denormalized" plain context node, where OuterAttrs are repeated for every InnerNode.

2. Add attribute IsVisible (type Visibility / WDVisibility) to this node, set in supply function VISIBLE only for first row in group

3. Bind table to this plain node as usual, then bind visibility of column editors corresponding to OuterAttrs to IsVisible attribute

VS

[Former Member]

Hi Valery,

I assume that the solution that you have given is the design-time equivalent of what Pran has posted. If so then thanks, but my requirements are different.(as mentioned in the previous post)

Thanks & Regards.

[Former Member]

I dont think so

with Valerys solution you should be getting something like this.

===============================

Master2 Detail1 Detail1 Detail1

.............Detail2 Detail2 Detail2

.............Detail2 Detail2 Detail2

Master3 Detail1 Detail1 Detail1

.............Detail2 Detail2 Detail2

.............Detail2 Detail2 Detail2

Regards

Pran

[Former Member]

Hi Pran,

You are right about the difference, but what I meant was that I still want both the outernode attribs "master" and innernode "detail" data visible at first go (because it isn't exactly a master-detail relationship, it more like a custom grouping of the data, the first column representing the grouping name ) and both your solutions assume so.

Can you suggest a way to circumvent the fact that one can't put in a Container UI element into a table cell editor?

Thanks and Regards,

Ashish

[Former Member]

If you are using most recent NW (SP9, actually SP7+ is enough) then you may reorginize your node into recursive node and use TreeByNestingTableColumn for first table column.

This solution also adds extra attributes on every level (actually, single recursive level), but allows to implement true master-detail relationship with load-on-demand functionality. Control itself (btw, just Table) will look like combination of tree and table

VS

[Former Member]

Hi Ashish

In both the solutions all the data is shown in the first go , no extra clicking on the group column (or master data) to see detail data.

Regards

Pran

[Former Member]

I am using version 6.40 SP9, but cannot seem to find the TreeByNestingTableColumn control to use. I need to create a tree whose nodes contain check boxes, and this control seems to be the only choice. Any ideas about what I'm missing?

Thanks,

DS

[Former Member]

Javadoc for Web Dynpro service pack 9 is here:

<a href="

https://media.sdn.sap.com/javadocs/NW04/SP9/webdynpro/index.html

">https://media.sdn.sap.com/javadocs/NW04/SP9/webdynpro/index.html</a>

Look for IWDTreeByNestingTableColumn. But it does not allow check boxes as tree nodes.

Armin

[Former Member]

...but nothing prevents to put check-boxes into regular column. The UI itself will be not so perfect, but if selection should be done on one (typically, most nested) level, then it looks pretty enough.

VS

[Former Member]

Thanks for the response, but my problem still remains... It seems I do not have the TreeByNestingTableColumn control on my installation. It's documentation is included in the help files, but I cannot actually find it in the IDE to use during development. I wonder if I have a version problem... Can you tell me where to check to verify I have the proper version (including this control). I have read in other threads that I need SP9 for this control - and I do - but evidently I am missing something...

Thanks,

DS

[Former Member]

Hi,

When your View UI designer is active, go to <b>Outline</b>, and right click on Table UI control. You will see pop-up menu with "Insert Master Column" item

VS

[Former Member]

Man... I really feel dumb now. That's it. I just didn't know that master column meant tree column. They really should use a more descriptive name... Oh well.

Thanks for the responses folks,

DS