BusinessObjects Board

Problems with Designer

building semantic layer
#1

Hi,

I am new to the forum. I work with business objects full time though have been travelling for the past year so am a bit rusty.

Recently in an interview I was asked for what I thought were problems with designer or what could be done to make it better?

One thing I hate is contexts but so did the interviewer so that scored points but he said in the second interview he would ask again so I need more ideas… Can anyone help?

Thanks
Marian

patricia (BOB member since 2004-06-16)

Pet Peeve in Designer!
#2

Contexts are good when used in the right scenario!
In a well designed universe with contexts a user will rarely be prompted to select a context. In case that the user gets prompted give the contexts meaningfull names and help texts!

If you avoid even considering contexts because you “just do not like them” you might do your users a disservice.

Ask Steve Krandel about contexts :wink:

Andreas :de: (BOB member since 2002-06-20)

#3

Thanks, I do use them just a lot of thought has to go into them. Any other ideas with problems with designer?

Cheers
Marian

patricia (BOB member since 2004-06-16)

#4

hi

in diemnsional model… contexts are best suited. in relational… most of the times if the loop is inbetween /center of a path of dataflow (which would make business sense to divide it into 2 or more distinct paths) contexts could be used while loops at statrt or end of a path can be done by a aliea table. ofcoure there are exceptions depending upon what would make more sense

problem with contexts are - at times using objects which might be common between 2 or more contexts it pops up a selection box - in this case, i will also add a dummy object for the context i want to follow in the query, such that it does not give me unwated extra rows (most of the times a measure) OR it creates a sync. queries… which are not wrong!!

somehow… i love contexts because i am sure of the data path i need to follow and i do not have to maintain… have additonal links on alias.

also for universe - i personally like to keep it straight forward in terms of objects and measures… and do the formulas and manupilations in the report.

linked universes - there are lot of posting here. i avoid them

Bo_Bhai :us: (BOB member since 2003-07-11)

#5

Many of the features of Designer have been the same for 5-6 years, so you would think that there is room for improvement. For example, there is currently no support for dynamic or inline tables, but that’s coming in 6.5. But frankly, I believe that Designer is an awesome tool and there is very little needed to be done.

There are some nice features planned for 6.5, and there is a post here that specifically lists some of the new features.

Dave Rathbun :us: (BOB member since 2002-06-06)

#6

If you really want to impress the interviewer, tell him when you should be using contexts.

Also, tell him the your goal as a universe designer is to make the life of the end-users as easy as possible.

To be honest, anyone who says they don’t like contexts, doesn’t know what they are for. You should get my presentation from tech support on “Empowering End Users through Smart Universe Design”. If you can’t find it, drop me an email and I’ll send it.

Steve Krandel :us: (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

#7

Oh man I love contexts! They’re awesome. Designer is pretty cool. The new index awareness feature, if we’ve understood it correctly, will fix one ‘problem’ that my DBAs whine about with BO…that it joins in ‘unnecessary’ tables.

I also agree with Dave and Steve. It is very cool and your goal is to make the users’ lives easy!

If I had to stretch to suggest an improvement, I’d say I with that I could show the users lists of values of say ‘Month Names’ and have the underlying search be on month number for the sake of efficiency.

Cindy Clayton :us: (BOB member since 2002-06-11)

#8

I thought you could do that by adding the Month Name object into the LOV query?

Anyhoo, how about just being able to resize the Aggregate Navigation window? That would be sooooo nice… :yesnod:

Paul Williams :uk: (BOB member since 2002-07-10)

#9

Would be nice:

  • to be able to apply custom sorts on LOVs
  • when clicking on a table and showing all associated objects that objects using @Aggregate_Awareness show up as well

Andreas :de: (BOB member since 2002-06-20)

#10

Yes but you have to show both and have the object driving the search as the first in the LOV query panel. I would like to show just the month names.

Cindy Clayton :us: (BOB member since 2002-06-11)

#11

In 5.1.2, I can do a sort without displaying the object by clicking the A-Z button in the Query Panel of a LOV. Is this not possible in version 6? Or are you speaking of another type of LOV?

KSG :us: (BOB member since 2002-07-17)

#12

The functionality of Designer is great; the fundamental problem with Designer, as with Supervisor and Reporter, is the far too many places where it has mediocre-to-excruciatingly-bad user interface design, that causes untold amounts of user frustration (and annoyance with BusinessObjects!! :frowning: ), and untold numbers of lost man-hours of productivity.

A Few Examples:
Pop-up Windows that are not (easily) maximizable/resizable, such as the Join window or the Aggregate Navigation window or the variable properties window (in Reporter) or the SQL window in Reporter or the [choose one] window. :confused:

No memory of a user’s preferred window settings/location, so one has to be constantly resizing and moving windows to the same place one did the last time. :nonod:

No ‘strategic map window’ - a tiny window where you can always see the map of the entire universe, and it will ‘jump’ you to where ever you click.
:idea:

Overwriting the user’s syntax preferences in the Join window or the Reporter SQL window. :nonod:

Annoyingly stupid message windows telling you, e.g., ‘the universe has now been succesfully imported.’ Especially when from the user’s perspective, which in this case is the only one that counts, the universe hasn’t imported at all, because they can’t yet work on it; they have to close the annoying message window before the universe will “really” import. :reallymad:

But at least v6 now has nice pretty pastel colors and new icons! :rotf: :wah:

I could name many more, but I’ll stop here. :lol: [Rant mode OFF.] But some managers at BusOBj need to seriously read user interface designer Alan Cooper’s book The Inmates are Running the Asylum!

JP Brooks :us: (BOB member since 2002-10-22)

#13

Right. I just don’t want to see the number at all. I would like the list to be…

January
February
March

with no month number but have the query bring back data for month number 1 when they pick ‘January’. Like I said, I’m
r e a c h i n g for a Designer criticism :-D.

Cindy Clayton :us: (BOB member since 2002-06-11)

#14

Thank you very much for all your advice.

Marian

patricia (BOB member since 2004-06-16)

#15

Cindy,

Actually you have the ability to filter by month name and have it match on month number without having to include both objects. You just customize the LOVs to return the formatted month name, but have the select object be the month number.

But back to the show.

Other issues you need to watch for are:

  • Joins that are not just one to one that will inflate your counts… especially when you use many to many joins.
  • Good use of Lookup Tables.
  • Possible use/requirement for calendar tables.
  • Linked Universe issues (if used).
  • Defining appropriate LOVs
  • Predefined Conditions to allow more flexibility.
  • Improper methods used for Aggregate Projection (or Measures defined incorrectly).
  • Improper use of the Where Clause in objects.

digpen :us: (BOB member since 2002-08-15)