Re: Looping Search
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2006
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 66790
interpreted = N
texte = Thanks Bill. The threaded bulleting board analogy is exactly what I was thinking. The reassignment scenario seems like the best approach. On 4/5/06 4:40 PM, "devaulw@onebox.com"
wrote: > This seems alot like a threaded bulletin board. > > So the problem is how to re-assign subordinates in the hierarchy when a > supervisor disappears. > > One way might be to prevent deleting 2 until it's subordinates are re-assigned > (i.e. throw up an error until the user fixes the condition). Not very > friendly since it lacks an intelligent default. > > Another way is to reassign the subordinates upon deleting 2 via a default, > i.e. 2 has a supervisor and when 2 is deleted, automatically assign everyone > who reports to 2 to 2's supervisor. I think that's what you were proposing. > Seems like a good solution too. Get 2's supervisor, search for anyone with 2 > as a supervisor, replacefounditems with 2's supervisor. > > If an entry already has a missing supervisor [lookup =notfound], it needs to > be flagged and a supervisor assigned. > > Bill > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Clint Davis > Sent: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 15:10:58 -0500 > To: "WebDNA Talk" > Subject: Re: Looping Search > > I *do* have a field in the database where each person's immediate supervisor > is listed. Right now, Person 1 is hard coded into the page. A [search] for > anyone whose immediate supervisor is Person 1 yields the Person 2 listing > and so on down the chain. This works unless someone at the top is removed: > if Person 2 left, Persons 3, 8, and 11 would have to be reassigned to Person > 1 as their immediate supervisor, or the whole chart would break. > > > On 4/5/06 2:57 PM, "Pat McCormick" wrote: > >> Why not just have a field for immediate supervisor for every Person? >> A demotion simply means changing the supervisor field. Or i guess it >> could also mean coming to a stop. (get it? demotion? anyone?) >> >> >> On Apr 5, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Clint Davis wrote: >> >>> I need to setup and org chart like this: >>> >>> Person 1 >>> -----Person 2 >>> ----------Person 3 >>> ---------------Person 4 >>> ---------------Person 5 >>> ---------------Person 6 >>> ---------------Person 7 >>> ----------Person 8 >>> ---------------Person 9 >>> ---------------Person 10 >>> ----------Person 11 >>> ---------------Person 12 >>> ---------------Person 13 >>> ---------------Person 14 >>> >>> All of these people have a record in the personnel database with a field >>> for >>> their immediate supervisor. Can this be done with a [loop]'ed [search] >>> versus >>> my current nested [search]es? I don't want it to break if Person 3 gets >>> demoted, for example. ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Thanks Bill. The threaded bulleting board analogy is exactly what I was thinking. The reassignment scenario seems like the best approach. On 4/5/06 4:40 PM, "devaulw@onebox.com" wrote: > This seems alot like a threaded bulletin board. > > So the problem is how to re-assign subordinates in the hierarchy when a > supervisor disappears. > > One way might be to prevent deleting 2 until it's subordinates are re-assigned > (i.e. throw up an error until the user fixes the condition). Not very > friendly since it lacks an intelligent default. > > Another way is to reassign the subordinates upon deleting 2 via a default, > i.e. 2 has a supervisor and when 2 is deleted, automatically assign everyone > who reports to 2 to 2's supervisor. I think that's what you were proposing. > Seems like a good solution too. Get 2's supervisor, search for anyone with 2 > as a supervisor, replacefounditems with 2's supervisor. > > If an entry already has a missing supervisor [lookup =notfound], it needs to > be flagged and a supervisor assigned. > > Bill > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Clint Davis > Sent: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 15:10:58 -0500 > To: "WebDNA Talk" > Subject: Re: Looping Search > > I *do* have a field in the database where each person's immediate supervisor > is listed. Right now, Person 1 is hard coded into the page. A [search] for > anyone whose immediate supervisor is Person 1 yields the Person 2 listing > and so on down the chain. This works unless someone at the top is removed: > if Person 2 left, Persons 3, 8, and 11 would have to be reassigned to Person > 1 as their immediate supervisor, or the whole chart would break. > > > On 4/5/06 2:57 PM, "Pat McCormick" wrote: > >> Why not just have a field for immediate supervisor for every Person? >> A demotion simply means changing the supervisor field. Or i guess it >> could also mean coming to a stop. (get it? demotion? anyone?) >> >> >> On Apr 5, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Clint Davis wrote: >> >>> I need to setup and org chart like this: >>> >>> Person 1 >>> -----Person 2 >>> ----------Person 3 >>> ---------------Person 4 >>> ---------------Person 5 >>> ---------------Person 6 >>> ---------------Person 7 >>> ----------Person 8 >>> ---------------Person 9 >>> ---------------Person 10 >>> ----------Person 11 >>> ---------------Person 12 >>> ---------------Person 13 >>> ---------------Person 14 >>> >>> All of these people have a record in the personnel database with a field >>> for >>> their immediate supervisor. Can this be done with a [loop]'ed [search] >>> versus >>> my current nested [search]es? I don't want it to break if Person 3 gets >>> demoted, for example. ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Clint Davis
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
RE: problems with dos and tracert + webDNA (1998)
WebCat, The Trend, & Consolidating... (1997)
[group] ? (1997)
Understanding texta (1997)
Setting up shop (1997)
Affiliate Marketing Question #2 (1998)
[quantity] within formulas (1997)
WebDNA tags in WebMerchant email templates ... (1997)
WebDNA - fun to compare (2005)
webdelivery not working (1998)
[WebDNA] after latest OSX upgrade, WebDNA not running? (2011)
Multiple security dbs (1997)
F3 crashing server (1997)
Re:emailer 150 (1997)
[isfile] ? (1997)
Multiple Merchant Accounts? (1997)
Nested tags count question (1997)
[searchString] (1997)
Unit Cost Look Up (2001)
Annoying character on writefile... (2004)