Based on a discussion in this thread, Ideas are only reviewed by SAP after receiving a certain number of votes. So, I’m asking for assistance from the BOB community Below are some of the Ideas I have submitted; please help me by voting for any and all that you agree with.
[list]
[:e61733c774]Universe-based variables: Need the ability to define a WebI variable in the universe; which could then be selected as a result object in any report.
[:e61733c774]Separate “Edit” and “Overwrite” rights: In XI3, it is not possible to enable a user to use “Modify” mode on a report without also granting the ability to overwrite the report.
Request to either:
Create a new right that would enable the use of Modify mode, while leaving the behavior of “Edit objects” as-is, or
Change the behavior of “Edit objects” to just enable the use of Modify mode, and create a new right “Overwrite objects” to allow the user to overwrite the report.
[:e61733c774]Replace original report when scheduling: Although Instances are very useful, there are times when it would be convienient to simply replace the original report with the refreshed version, rather than creating an instance. This is particularly true for users who schedule reports from their Favorites, and have no way of setting the instance limit from Infoview. Request to add an option when scheduling, to “Replace original report upon successful completion”.
[:e61733c774]Report listing columns: Request to give users more options as to the columns available for display in the Infoview report list. “Last Saved Date” is much more useful to us that “Last Run”.
[:e61733c774]“Delete File” option on File Events[:e61733c774]Overwrite mode for Inbox docs
[:e61733c774]Scheduled report status in Infoview: In 6.5, Infoview users had a BCA Console view from the Infoview home page. Need to have something similar to this for XI.
Also, it would be great to have an alert in the Infoview main header when users’ scheduled reports complete.
[:e61733c774]Search within an empty search result: Whenever I search for something in XI3, then perform another search, the second search is done within the results of the first search. This is handy (sometimes), but completely useless when the first search produces no results. Request to change this behavior, so a search will instead replace the original search, if no results were produced.
[:e61733c774]Don’t display context prompt when it is irrelevant: Example: Universe contains four tables, A, B, C, D. Context 1 includes tables A, B, and C; Context 2 includes tables B, C, and D. If I build a query that includes objects from tables B and C, then I am prompted to choose the context. Regardless of the context I choose, the SQL is still constructed in the same way. WebI should detect that the SQL from both contexts would be identical, and therefore not display a context prompt.
[:e61733c774]Job Server security: Need the ability to apply security to Job Servers, to prevent their use by reports that are scheduled without a selected Server Group.
[/list]
Please feel free to use this thread to shamelessly promote your own
Good stuff, Joe. I voted for many of them. I also created one, inspired by one of yours. My idea is to provide an option to have the output of a schedule document delivered, as a new document, to a different folder than the folder housing the original scheduled document. You can vote for it here.
I agree - especially since they’re subtracting negative votes from positive votes rather than counting them separately. It would be nice if the site would encourage down-voters to post their reasoning.
I can’t for the life of me think of why someone would not want the functionality I’ve asked for on this one (though there may be a good reason). You may not need it, but that’s no reason to down-vote it.
I think tracking negative votes will be there soon and Kuhan also seems to agree.
Please feel free to add your comments here on the same https://cw.sdn.sap.com/cw/ideas/6738
You see when I talked of simplying the version numbers (in the earlier thread) someone seems to disagree and voted it down, they liked the complicated version numbering more…
But in that case the “Up” votes that you’ve given to the ideas you like will increase their priority. By down-voting an Idea, you are saying that you disagree with it.
If you don’t say that in a comment, it’s not clear what your intent is. Are you down-voting because you disagree with it, or because you support it but just less than others? As it is, a down vote implies a “dislike”.
If you down-vote an idea because you feel there are others that are higher priority, what will happen when those others are implemented? The one you down-voted will still appear to have low community support even though you really do agree with it.
Unless, of course, you plan on reversing your votes once your favorites get accepted. In which case, go for it
Remove Derived Table Restrictions: Currently in Designer, there is a restriction that the SQL in a Derived Table MUST begin with the word “Select”. I would like to see this restriction removed. Any valid “Read” SQL for the database should be allowed in Designer. For example, in Teradata, a recursive query begins with “WITH RECURSIVE”, not “SELECT”. However, even though this is valid SQL, Designer won’t allow it due to this restriction.
My idea: Re-design overhaul the IDT, that tool is too cumbersome to use. Workflows are complicated and non-intuitive and require too many clicks to accomplish something.
Below are some of the Ideas I have submitted; please help me by voting for any and all that you agree with.
(BOB member since 2002-08-29)
(BOB member since 2002-08-08)
(BOB member since 2002-08-15)
, which would be great, but please provide the explanation…
…
(BOB member since 2002-06-20)