Am I the only one who hates the template editor?

[Rudy]

As change happens more frequent than I can capture, I am already not really in favor of generating .rtf documents for these are out-dated by the time the generator is done. However in a larger organization, people expect word format documents to sign off on.

Now maybe I have not yet found the trick, but the template editor hardly ever does what I would expect of the editor. For example, I have a template defined without any diagrams visible in the template. This template is a good foundation for another template, but now I need to add a diagram to the document. I can select the diagram checkbox, but nowhere in my template do I see the yellow marked "diagram>" indicated.

This is one of the many examples of how the template editor does not provide me what I would expect of the template editor.

Is there a (smart) way to edit templates, without the need to use the template editor for inserting fields, tables and formatting?

[Graham_Moir]

No you're not the only one.

And good question.  I too would be interested in any constructive replies.

[Rudy]

I guess I was jumping to conclusions in my original statement.
I just upgraded from 797 to 799, where all RTF issues are solved, and now my templates don't work anymore.

Maybe I should forget about EA all together, if I cannot provide the required information to the rest of the organization

[Ethan_AUbin]

The RTF template editor is painful.  I've lost hours of work when templates stop working for no reason. E.g. starting with a template, modifying it, saving a copy under a different name and getting different output.  The cut/paste when tags are selected is broken/inconsistent.  The outline in the left hand side does not offer the flexibility we require. The RTF editor sucks (but thats a different rant). Random elements can't be included by the template editor (e.g. the matrix views). We've had to hire a consultant to get documents out of the jet database directly because the RTF generation provided with EA is so bad. This will cost much much more than the actual cost of EA, and we probably would have been better off just using another tool from the start.

[Thogek]

The RTF template editor is painful.  I've lost hours of work when templates stop working for no reason. E.g. starting with a template, modifying it, saving a copy under a different name and getting different output.  The cut/paste when tags are selected is broken/inconsistent.  The outline in the left hand side does not offer the flexibility we require. The RTF editor sucks (but thats a different rant). Random elements can't be included by the template editor (e.g. the matrix views). We've had to hire a consultant to get documents out of the jet database directly because the RTF generation provided with EA is so bad. This will cost much much more than the actual cost of EA, and we probably would have been better off just using another tool from the start.

I can echo most of these comments.  Our experience has not been quite this bad (although we haven't been using it very long), but it does have its share of frustrations due to the fickle instability of various elements of the RTF templating.

Meanwhile, we love EA for its modelling capabilities and relative ease of use.  The RTF generator is conceptually an extremely useful extension of this program, as there are many cases where we need to be able to produce our information in document form for easier review by a larger audience, but at this point, we seem to be spending at least as much time working on the templates and generation process as we are on the modelling itself.    

I'd love to hear from someone at Sparx whether there are any plans to strengthen EA's RTF generator, or replace it, or...?

[Trousers]

Yep.  Same experiences here...great as a modeling product, but frustrating as a documentation generator (to wit: RTF Style Template Editor).  As previously commented, this process seems to be disproportionally high (sucking a lot of time as our deadline gets closer).  I applaud it as a concept, but this implementation is lacking!

[alesliehughes]

After using the RTF editor for sometime, I know how annoying it can be.

You will be happy to know that the next build of EA (801) will have improvements to the RTF editor.

Alistair

[Thogek]

You will be happy to know that the next build of EA (801) will have improvements to the RTF editor.

Now that would be worth grabbing an update for.

Any clues on what specific improvements are involved?

[han]

Can anything be said about what we can expect from the new editor? And when will build 801 be maide public?

Greetz,

Han.

[Graham_Moir]

Builds are released roughly on a monthly cycle (no guarantees though),  the last one - build 800 was on 10th Nov, so on this basis we're not too far away from build 801

[potterm]

I share everyone's frustrations with the RTF editor - as others have said, at best the editor is buggy (especially when building templates, copy/paste etc. etc.) and in some areas the report generation doesn't do quite what I want so I've resigned myself to building an add-in that will automate Word directly.

But this is a slower project - in the meantime I find myself using a combination of the RTF editor and for jobs it doesn't do well a macro from within Word (using EA automation to pull things out of the model).

Here are some of the things I'm hoping to build into my add-in which are currently lacking in EA's own document generator:

- Figure numbering
- Finer grained selection of elements to include in reports (e.g. all elements in diagram, selections based on attribute filters etc.)
- Better control over MS-Word formatting (i.e. define the template in Word, allowing exact formatting to be applied rather than relying on consistency of styles etc.).

It would be great if the new release were to address some of these issues, but I doubt it somehow.

I don't wish to knock EA - it's a fine product (especially for the price), but for my particular requirements I think a "home-grown" reporting solution will suit me best (and of course all credit to EA for giving me the flexibility to do this).  And having said that, I'm not convinced that other CASE tools do a better job on reporting - all have their quirks I think, and I've frequently heard report generation horror stories about tools costing many times what EA does.

Cheers,
Martin.

[alesliehughes]

- Figure numbering

The current editor does support this, but the "defaults" didnt make sense at all.
The new defaults for Figure Numbering will be 1. -> 1.0 -> 1.0.0, etc.  

The biggest problem is people dont understand how the RTF editor works with numbered lists, and how to get each section to link with the previous one.  

To get this to work, open the RTF editor,
Place the cursor on the line you want to start the numbering.
Select "Paragraph --> Numbering", (Keep the cursor on this line)
Select "Edit --> Edit List Item", Select the Item with the largest number. Click OK.
Give it a Meaningful Name. Click OK.

We will setup the default Numbering now.
NOTE: Build 801 will have this by default.
Select "Edit --> List and Overrides --> Edit List Level..."
Select your List from the dropdown.
Select "Level 2"
Change the "Number text" to "~1~.~2~"
Select "Level 3"
Change the "Number text" to "~1~.~2~.~3~"
Click OK.

Now we have the Numbering setup, for each section you want numbered, all you have to do is the following.
Select "Paragraph --> List Numbering", and select Name and level, click OK.

Now when you generate a Document it should work as expected.

Hope this Helps.

Alistair

[potterm]

Thanks for your explanation Alistair - but does this work with Word figure numbers?  What I need to be able to do is embed an RTF report in a Word document that has existing figures in it, such that Word can re-number the EA figures when you update fields in the document.  So the generator needs to be able to create Word field codes I think.  There seems to be some features in the RTF editor/generator which get close to providing this, but I couldn't ever get Word Figure numbering to work with it.

regards,
Martin.

[vadimo]

Thanks for the explanation Alistair. First I wanted to make a comment and then ask you a question.

The comment is that I think the reason people (myself including) don't have good understanding of how numbering and editing of list items and overrides work in RTF Style Template Editor is because User Guide provides no help whatsoever on these features. I've counted at least 7 menu items (see the list below) whose descriptions are absent from EA Help altogether.

 Edit --> List and Overrides (with 5 sub-menus)
 Paragraph --> Numbering
 Paragraph --> List Numbering...

I am very glad to hear that there will be some improvements in this area but unless these features are documented in the first place not too many people will be able to take advantage of them either.

The question is - do you know if new build (801) will improve support for List Numbering of nested elements? Current functionality (build 800) does not seem to allow nesting list numbers for nested elements/packages.

What I am trying to say is that once List Numbering item (i.e. "~1~") is selected for a paragraph it stays the same regardless of the nesting level of the element or package. There seems to be no way to make it advance to the next level (i.e. "~1~.~2~") and then the next (i.e. "~1~.~2~.~3~") in order to get the following kind of hierarchy
 1
 1.1
 1.1.1
 ...
 1.2
 1.2.1
 ...
 2
 ...

Thank you in advance.

Vadim

[peter.zrnko]

In List properties there is an option "Multilevel List".
In List Override properties there is "Override levels".
In list level Properties there is "Restart numbering when override changes for a list".

This sounds well. But the help is really missing.