Community
Participate
Working Groups
It would be good to have the ability to put headers in the upper left corner of the cross tab... so if i can have something like Name Ticket Product 1 Product 2 John 1 2 3 Jack 1 3 5 Please tell me if i'm not very clear.. Thanks
Fixed. You can put any report item in Crosstab corner header now.
(In reply to comment #1) > Fixed. You can put any report item in Crosstab corner header now. > I just had the same problem in my report and I'm not sure if your fix will be satisfying. What about crosstabs which have more than one row dimension? Name Surname ID | Ticket Product 1 Product 2 John Johnson 1 | | 1 | 2 | 3 Jack Black 2 | | 1 | 3 | 5 When report will have auto-layout option enabled won't there be any offset between header fields and values field below? I think it would be more efficient if those headers were actual column headers, exactly like this header field above details section of a crosstab (which can't be removed from report by the way :(
I have the same doubts as those expressed in comment #2. The ability to put anything in the corner header is great but doesn't properly address this enhancement request. Here's an even more complex example than this presented in comment #2: +-------------------+-------+-----------+-----------+ | products | name | product A | product B | | x +-------+-----------+-----------+ | orders | price | 12.34 | 56.78 | +--------+----------+-------+-----------+-----------+ | number | date | +--------+----------+ +-----------+-----------+ | 123 | 01/01/08 | | 3 pcs | | +--------+----------+ +-----------+-----------+ | 456 | 04/04/08 | | 2 pcs | 5 pcs | +--------+----------+ +-----------+-----------+
As it's said the fix doesn't solve the issue.. we need at least the ability to have a header per column on the row side
(In reply to comment #4) > As it's said the fix doesn't solve the issue.. we need at least the ability to > have a header per column on the row side > As the header cell can contain any report item, you can use a grid in this case.
(In reply to comment #5) > As the header cell can contain any report item, you can use a grid in this case. But can you align the columns/rows of that grid with the columns/rows of dimensions reliably without hardcoding the widths/heights for both?
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > As the header cell can contain any report item, you can use a grid in this case. > > But can you align the columns/rows of that grid with the columns/rows of > dimensions reliably without hardcoding the widths/heights for both? > No, you have to align the columns of grid and the cross tab cells by hard coding the width/height. This is our agreed solution for this use case.
It would be really useful to have that "column names grid" for the dimensions auto-filed like the names of the measurement section. That would save me a lot of time. Please think about it.
(In reply to comment #7) > No, you have to align the columns of grid and the cross tab cells by hard > coding the width/height. This is our agreed solution for this use case. This is really not a solution at all. The whole point of a crosstab is that it is dynamic and this kind of ruins that. You can do it on the column dimensions if you disable line breaking, because you know how many rows there are, but there is often no way to know the with of the columns in advance. You have to guess and then you will get issues with text breaking or cut off and what not. Horizontal dimensions really need headers that automatically align to the column. And this is not a special "use case" like you make it sound. I have NEVER created a report where I didn't need to have headers for the dimensions. Why would someone think that the dimensions are self-explanatory? Only for the most trivial examples is this the case. In most cases it is just a number, a name or even a code, but there is no way to know what it means. This really should be built-in functionality. The BIRT crosstab functionality is awesome, but this simple detail really ruins it.
I seems that this bug/feature request is solved in 4.2.2. A very big THANK YOU to the person who fixed that. YOU ROCK!
