Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Victor:
I propose to add such filters later. I am creating a case on the site with
tasks for
me. So we will not forget it. But for now I think it is more important to pay
attention on the conception. As I understood from our last discussion you not
satisfied with the current conception, you say that it is not user-friendly to
select
x-axis parameter because sometimes there are no some parameters in the list...
So
lets define what we want to see (I mean what must be in x lists, how to define
calculation option for each simulation etc.) and when everything will work
correctly
I will easy add some filters. It is very good that you say me about such
features
now, but is it OK if we implement them later?
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 19 Apr 2010 at 7:59
Jannis:
OK. I agree. BUT the distinction of constant and variable y-axis parameter is
important
and we have to do it. As of now we keep the concept of displaying only the
common x-
axis parameter for all calculation options (I mean the case when “Use local
parameters”
is unchecked and we have more than one rows in the diagram table and different
calculation options! Then again: In this case we do it like you designed it:
That means
we display as x-axis only the common setting parameters.
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 19 Apr 2010 at 7:59
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 19 Apr 2010 at 8:25
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 19 Apr 2010 at 8:27
Jannis proposed next solution in Corr 16.9.2010.doc:
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 17 Sep 2010 at 3:53
Attachments:
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 8 Oct 2010 at 3:56
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 8 Oct 2010 at 3:56
Original comment by victorbarinov
on 17 Jan 2013 at 5:53
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
victorbarinov
on 19 Apr 2010 at 7:59