Messages in trees #403
Messages in trees #403
Conversation
|
Note that the algorithm is ambiguous is borderline cases. Consider the linear hierarchy A - B - C - D. If TopLevels is called with Levels=3 and ExpandLevels=[C0,B2], then the result depends on the order in which the entries are processed:
(If Levels=2, the processing order can only be B2 then C0, because C is not visible at first.) |
I agree. But then again, I don't think we really need to provide an algorithm here. The intention is that C0 overrides B2 locally, that is, in the end C needs to be collapsed. This corresponds to a user who first expanded B by 2 and then collapsed C again. If it would have been the other way around, we at least (v4.ODataModel) would have removed C0 - and others could do as well! P.S.: Would it help to add some order like "top down"? |
vocabularies/Hierarchy.xml
Outdated
| </Property> | ||
| <Property Name="MessageCount" Type="Collection(Hierarchy.MessageCountType)" Nullable="false"> | ||
| <Annotation Term="Common.Experimental" /> | ||
| <Annotation Term="Core.Description" String="Number of messages for each severity a [matching](#MatchCount) descendant of a node has in the unlimited hierarchy" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we refer to "matching" here? Are we only interested in messages for the matching nodes? If their ancestors are added as well, would we not show their messages?
|
Do we need the same for |
No description provided.