Sparx Systems Forum
Enterprise Architect => General Board => Topic started by: CurlyHead86 on January 27, 2010, 02:42:35 am
-
I would like to have indentation on the numbering in a notes field. Is it possible to extend the rich text notes toolbar by changing some settings?
Instead of only this:
1
2
3
I would also like to be able to do this in a note textfield:
1
1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.1.1
2
2.1
...
-
anyone?
-
The Sparx position is that if you want more formatting than what is provided you should use a linked document.
-
The Sparx position is that if you want more formatting than what is provided you should use a linked document.
But Simon, you can't render the linked document in the Notes compartment, or did I miss something?
Perhaps a feature request could be in order? I rather like the idea of having full rich text "notes" renderable in the Notes compartment.
Paolo
-
Perhaps a feature request could be in order? I rather like the idea of having full rich text "notes" renderable in the Notes compartment.
Paolo
Yes, ... because writing the different steps of a use case will be much easier.
-
Perhaps a feature request could be in order? I rather like the idea of having full rich text "notes" renderable in the Notes compartment.
Paolo
Yes, ... because writing the different steps of a use case will be much easier.
Actually, my feature request was to render the linked document as a note compartment.
Simon was indicating that Sparx wouldn't implement the full rich text Notes (in situ) feature.
Paolo
-
I heartily concur with making it possible to display linked documents in the Notes compartment - perhaps by having a navigation control to page between the notes themselves and the linked document. This would, however, seem to require embedding the TE Edit control (I believe this is the basis for the embedded RTF editor?) in the Property dialog together with the "HTML-Lite" control currently used for the Notes compartment. If this were done, maybe it would make sense to revert back to plain text for Notes and reserve the Linked Document feature for "Rich Notes"?
Cheers,
Fred Woolsey
-
I heartily concur with making it possible to display linked documents in the Notes compartment - perhaps by having a navigation control to page between the notes themselves and the linked document. This would, however, seem to require embedding the TE Edit control (I believe this is the basis for the embedded RTF editor?) in the Property dialog together with the "HTML-Lite" control currently used for the Notes compartment. If this were done, maybe it would make sense to revert back to plain text for Notes and reserve the Linked Document feature for "Rich Notes"?
Cheers,
Fred Woolsey
Thanks for the support Fred! I concur with your point about the Notes field returning to pure text (although I guess we already have that if you DON'T put in any formatting). If one could add the ability to generate the (plain) text from the linked document it would be magical! Sometimes, as you know, you want the pretty stuff and sometimes you want the hard stuff... ;)
Maybe the "generate" function could have two modes: Pure text or "best fit" HTML?
Paolo
-
I would like to get rid of the linked document within EA. To me, it's like a workaround to enrich notes with 'looks'. If it is only the notes with full rtf-editor capability, every one can do what one wants. So the purists can put only text in it, and I can even put a screendump in it if I want ;-)
Since some of the linked documents won't come out, if I hide them in the wrong place, this would really be perfect. I won't split up the notes into various appearances. Just one decent one :P
-
Marcello,
I don't disagree with having the current Linked Document replace the Notes field completely; however, I would keep and expand the Linked Document feature, changing it to an "Attachments" feature allowing any number of arbitrary OLE (BLOB) objects to be associated with an element. This would allow PDFs, DWG files, etc. to be associated with an element while keeping them WITHIN the EA project database; also, if done right, the attachments would keep their association with the application that created them, allowing them to be launched from within EA.
Cheers,
Fred W
-
hey Fred, I agree on havving variuos attachments. I like the option. But since the reporting tools is a piece of cr@p, and the thing can't automatically include an attachment into an RTF document, we should think this over.
I want stuff in, and stuff out :-)
-
Perhaps a feature request could be in order? I rather like the idea of having full rich text "notes" renderable in the Notes compartment.
Paolo
Yes, ... because writing the different steps of a use case will be much easier.
Actually I'm not convinced that a Linked document or the Notes compartment is the place to document Use Cases. I like to treat each component of a Use Case, e.g. Stakeholders, Basic Path, Alternate Path, Business Rules etc.. as individual objects/items in their own right within the container of the Use Case. EA supprts this and by doing it this way you can use EA to check completeness of your Use Cases and import the Basic/Alternate Path into Test Cases.
-
The advantage of having a notes with full rtf options, is that people can choose how they work, completely flexible, like the rest of the EA-tool.
-
I think you've missed my point, I don't disagree with having improved
editing capabilities within Element Notes - in fact I totally agree, however what I was saying is that the Notes Compartment/Linked document is the wrong place to write Use Case content because free format narrative does not lend itself easily to automatic checking, tracing and re-use.
-
hahaha, well, actually, this thread isn't about use cases :-)
hihihi, I needed a laugh, thanks....
It's about notes in common, so... you know... on a class, an a post-condition, on a table...
I won't recomment it for writing a use case inside a note.
(I use one note per one scenario, don't beat me with a stick :P)
But during my analyses-fase, I sometimes get screens drown by customers, or by their kids, or stuff like that, and I could actually scan them, put them inside a linked document as part of the "birth" process of the analyses-fase. EA is my repository. (for as long as I keep my faith, which is very low today.... :-/)
-
Yes, I agree, this thread isn't about Use Cases, but Curlyhead86, who started the thread, stated "because writing the different steps of a use case will be much easier" as part of the justification for enhancing the editing capabilities within Notes. It was that statement I was replying to. Glad I gave you a good laugh though.
-
Graham,
I think Marcello's laughter was due to the fact that he's had some, shall we say, "frustrations" with trying to get EA to include linked documents for Use cases in RTF reports. It's one of those "if I don't laugh I'll cry" sort of things, I believe...
Fred
-
Actually... my frustrations go a lot deeper than linked documents right now...
http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1265267047
But back to this one....
What if you want more than just the ordinary look, then you could do something nice. (btw: Use cases isn't about looks, I know, but for being a dutchman, I like freedom ;D, so I can imagine this whish.)
-
See also http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1260999778/
I agree with Marcelloh - the notes and linked document should become one and the same.
Notes are really a kludge.
-
Only one comment. RTF is not a standard. In fact it's not even standard.
ymmv
bruce
-
Bruce,
It is, as a practical matter, a de-facto standard, and the specs for the various RTF versions are available from Microsoft (not Micro$oft in this case, 'cause the specs are free). It is listed as a standard on the UK JISC site, for example, and it has its own MIME type (text/rtf).
That said, the various implementations of RTF in the various products that use it are inconsistent, and there isn't (as far as I know) a minimum set of features that must be implemented to conform to any "standard implementation" of RTF. As a result, a given RTF file may (and often will) look different in Word vs. WordPad vs. OpenOffice vs. AbiWord vs. the Microsoft RichTextEdit control, etc., and transferring between the different programs/components may result in document formatting changes.
It is often, however, "close enough for government work" (as they say), and programs that read and write RTF abound. And haven't you ever had problems with web pages that work fine in IE but not in Firefox? So even "standard" (as HTML 4.01 is) doesn't guarantee complete compatibility.
Fred