I need to sort data in LibreOffice Calc using a user-defined sorting function (Small, Medium, Large, X-Large). The sort menu offers a "custom sort" option, but the sorts are all pre-defined and I do not see how to add a new one.
Disclaimer: I am completing an assignment intended for users of Microsoft Excel, but I prefer to use LibreOffice over booting up Windows.
I also need to sort cells that are formatted in a certain way, specifically cells with a red fill need to be sorted at the top of the list.
The "custom sort" lists are defined in the Options dialog.
You can add additional sort lists manually. Go to Tools->Options->LibreOffice Calc->Sort Lists and add a new list.
Sorting based on formatting is not yet supported in LibreOffice. There have been plans to add this functionality but nobody has worked on implementing the feature yet.
Related
Multisort seems to work just fine...as long as you are using built-in sort types (see this example, which loads with the first two columns included in the default sort). As soon as I attempt to use a custom sort function, sorting only seems to take into account the first column specified (see this example, which is identical to the functional first example - although it specifies a custom sort function). I tried looking through the documentation, as well as looking through the source code for the built-in sort types, and I don't see anything different from what I am doing?
(Interestingly enough, the sort icons would make it seem like both columns were sorted; but if you put a breakpoint in the custom sort function, you can clearly see that it never gets called for the second column. Also potentially worth noting is that this only seems to be an issue if both columns use a custom sort. If I alter the second example such that the first column uses one of the built-in sort types - either by manually using one, or just accepting the default - then the multisort appears to function as expected. In the inverse case, using a custom sort for the first column and a built-in sort for the second column, again only the first column specified is actually sorted. I also [posted this as a potential bug on the project itself][https://github.com/tannerlinsley/react-table/issues/3512], but am cross-posting it here on the off chance that I just missed something when attempting to implement my custom sort functions.)
From the corresponding project issue:
"This, in fact, seems to be a problem with your custom sort type. You see, in the example you provided, your defaultAlphanumericSort only returns 1 or -1.
However, if you look at the defaultOrderByFn of react-table, you will notice that the secondary (tertiary and so on ... ) sorting is only applied, if the previous sorting functions returned 0. Extend your custom sort type to return 0 on equality and you should be fine."
I'm implementing a native iOS application, which provides a feature to search for articles using keywords and several search filters such as author, year, publisher etc. Each of these search filters has several options such as 2014, 2013, and 2012 for the year filter, or Academe Research Journals, Annex Publishers, and Elmer Press for the publisher filter. Each of these options has a BOOL stating whether the option is selected or not. I need an object that wraps the search keywords and search filters so that I can send it to the server, which is responsible for the search operation.
Which data structure should I use to represent these search filters in the wrapper class?
Something like XML comes to mind:
<year>2014</year>
<publisher>Annex Publishers</publisher>
Although I find it rather bulky. I'd probably prefer something like:
year=2014|publisher=Annex Publishers
You'll need to escape = and | appearing in the field names or values, but this is easy to do.
This could just be a single string sent across.
In terms of actual data structures, you could have a map of field name to value, only containing entries where the option is selected. Or you could have a class containing pointers / references for each field, set to null if the option is not selected.
Another totally different consideration is to use an enumerated type, i.e. mapping each possible value to an integer, typically resulting in less memory used and faster (and possibly more robust) code, depending on how exactly this is done.
You could map it as follows, for example:
Academe Research Journals 0
Annex Publishers 1
Elmer Press 2
Then, rather than sending "Annex Publishers" as publisher, you could just send 1.
year=2014|publisher=1
The extension for multiple possible values for a field can be done in various ways, but it's fairly easy to do:
<year>2014</year>
<year>2013</year>
<publisher>Annex Publishers</publisher>
Or:
year=2014,2013|publisher=Annex Publishers
I am unable to change the order of modules in Joomla1.6. I tried by clicking the order option . But there are many modules with the same order number and it does not move up or down even after using the arrow keys.
Any thoughts?
Reorder them yourself. Type in 1,2,3,4, etc. according to the manner you want them to be in, then click the 'save' icon next to the order header.
Then refresh your page to ensure they've reorganized appropriately.
When ordering anything in Joomla, make sure the list you are looking at it ordered by the ordering column first. Most times you can not change ordering at all, unless your list is sorted by ordering first.
I know this is a very old question, and Joomla is currently 3.4.8, soon to release 3.5, and the above instructions do not apply any longer, but I thought I should add a small detail here.
In case you are working with a complex template that has many pre-installed modules at various module positions, you may come up with this:Module ordering may not work properly if you are filtering the results in the module manager using a search keyword.
Make sure that you clear search, navigate to the position you need re-arranged (ideally, use the filters on the left column to only show that specific position) and then re-arrange. It should work.
Took me a while to realize.
I've read somewhere (can't remember/find where) an article about web usability describing when to use drop downs and when to use autocomplete fields.
Basically, the article says that the human brain cannot store more then the last five options presented to choose.
For example, in a profile form, where there is your current occupation, and the system gives you a bunch of options, when you read the sixth options, your brain can't remember the first one anymore. This example is a great place to use an autocomplete field, where the user types something that he thinks that would be his occupation and then select the better from the few options filtered.
I would like to hear your opinion about this subject.
When should I use a drop-down and when I should use a Autocomplete field?
For a limited list, don't use an autocomplete edit box or combobox, but use a listbox where all values are visible all at once. For limited lists, especially with static content of up to about 8 items, this takes up real estate, but presents the user with a better immediate overview.
For less than 5 items a radiogroup or checkbox group (multiple selections) may also be better.
For lists whose content is dynamic, like a list of contacts, a (scrolling) listbox or combobox are appropriate because you never know how many items will be in the list. To keep it manageable, you will need to allow for some kind of filtering and/or autocomplete.
Autocomplete usually suffers from the fact that what the users types needs to match a string from the beginning. I hate those except for when they are used to complete a value based on what I typed in that (type of) field before. E.g. what browsers nowadays offer when filling out online forms.
Allowing a user to start typing in a combobox usually suffers the same drawback. But admittedly it doesn't need to if the filtering is based on "like %abc%" instead of "starts with abc"
When dealing with lists that can have many similar items, I really like the way GMail's "To" field handles it. You start typing any part of someone's name or e-mail address and GMail will drop down a list presenting all the contacts whose name or e-mail address contains the characters you have typed so far anywhere within them. Using the up and down keys changes the selection in the dropped down list (without affecting what you have typed) and pressing enter adds the currently selected item to the "To" field. By far the best user experience I have had so far when having to select something from a list.
Haven't found any components yet that can do this, but it's not too hard to "fake" by combining an edit box and a listbox that drops down when you start typing and has its contents is filtered based on what has been typed so far.
I would use 2 criteria,
1) How long is the list, if the list contains 5 elements you better use a combobox as it will be easier for the user (better UX)
2) In case the list is long, how easy for the user to remember the prefix of what he/she is looking for... if it's not easy, using autocomplete is irrelevant..
I'd say it depends on the diversity in the list, and the familiarity with the list items.
If for example the list contained over 5 car brands (list items I'm familiar with), no problem.
If on the other hand the list has over 5 last names, it could take me some more time before I'd make a selection.
You should probably just try out both options and trust your gut on which you find easier to use.
Here's the opposite approach:
The worst time to use an auto-complete box is when you have a finite and relatively small set of options, and the user doesn't know the range of valid options. For example, if you're selling used cars and you have a mixed bag of brands, simply listing the brands in a combobox is more efficient and easier to browse than an auto-complete method.
Being able to remember the last 5 options is most likely irrelevant unless you have a giant list of options and are requiring the user to select the most relevant item.
An alternative approach is to use both. I believe Dojo has a widget that acts as both a combobox and an auto-complete field. You can either choose to start typing and it will narrow down the possible options, or you can interact with it with your mouse and browse it like a combobox.
I usually look at how big the list is going to be. If there are going to be more than 15 options then it just seems easier to find if they can just start typing.
The other circumstance for me is when there is an other option and they can free type it. This essentially eliminates the need for two controls since you can combine in one.
The main difference has nothing to do with usability but more to do with what defines the acceptable inputs.
You normally use a ComboBox when you have a predefined list of acceptable inputs (e.g. an Enum or list of occupations).
An auto-complete field is best used when there are many known inputs BUT custom input is accepted as well. The user will become frustrated if they type "Programmer" in as their occupation but it wasn't one of the pre-defined, acceptable inputs, and they are given a message that their input is not valid.
Keep in mind that ComboBoxes do allow you to type in them to select the first matching option. Some types of ComboBoxes (depending on the UI framework you are using) even allow free-form text fields at the top or side of the field to search or add to the list.
Of coarse the best way to determine what YOUR user will prefer is testing: A/B, field, user, etc.
Hope this helps you solve your dilemma!
First of all, I finally made this a wiki, but I believe a "simple," straightforward answer is highly desirable, especially since the result would define a unified IDE behavior for everyone. More on the simple later.
In the past, I've blogged about what it means to have a well-behaved member selection drop down. If you haven't read it, do so now. :)
Visual Studio 2010 adds new features to the IntelliSense selection process that makes things ... not so easy. I believe there's great power we can harness from these features, but without a clean set of governing rules it's going to be very difficult.
Before you answer, remember this: The rules should allow someone "in tune" with the system to take advantage of the IntelliSense power with fewer keystrokes and less time than other solutions provide. This is not just about what you're used to - If you use a system as long and frequently as I do, relearning the patterns is trivial next to the time it saves to have a great algorithm behind it.
Here are the controllable axes:
Filtering: A "full" list contains every identifier or keyword allowed at the current location, without regard for the partially typed text the cursor is within.
Sorting: We (at least Visual Studio users) are used to the member selection drop down being sorted in alphabetical order. Other possibilities are partial sorting by some notion "relevance," etc.
Selection: Based on the currently typed text, we have the ability to select one item as the "best match." Selection states are:
No item selected
Passive selection: one item outlined, but pressing ., <space> or similar won't fill it in without using an arrow key to make it:
Active selection: one item selected, and unless Esc or an arrow key is pressed, a . or <space>, etc will auto-complete the item.
My previous set of rules restricted the manipulation to the selection axis. They took into account:
Characters typed as matched against list items with a StartsWith operation (prefix matching), with variants for whether the match was case-sensitive.
Previous completions that started with the same set of characters.
The following are additionally available and potentially useful, but not all have to be used:
CamelCase matches or underscore_separation ("us"): Long, expressive identifiers? Not a problem.
Substring matches: long prefixes hindering your selection speed? Not a problem.
Information available in the summary text, where available: I lean against this but I must admit it's come in handy in the Firefox address bar, so you never know.
The rules you write should address the axes (in bold above) in order. In my previous posts on the subject, the rules were very simple, but the additional considerations will likely make this a bit more complicated.
Filtering
Sorting
Selection
Just one addition or remark ...
IntelliSense should adapt to the context. In the case of Visual Studio, places where only subtypes of a specific type or interface may be used, the dropdown list should filter by these.
IList list = new (Drop down all the types implementing IList) - not all possible types!