Data Tree Layout Options: Vertical versus Horizontal?
I have a question that has been bugging me for years, going back to many
versions of ReportBuilder. I'm finally going to ask.
In the data tree, when a person selects the layout option and selects all,
he can then select either Tabular or Vertical. What is the thinking in
using "Vertical" to describe that particular layout?
It seems to me and many of my customers that the layout is Horizontal. The
field name is to the left of the field, resulting in a horizontal
orientation of field name to field value. The tabular layout results in
what I would call a vertical orientation. Perhaps some explanation would
help me be less confused about the terms being used here, or maybe the
layout description for Vertical should be changed to Horizontal.
versions of ReportBuilder. I'm finally going to ask.
In the data tree, when a person selects the layout option and selects all,
he can then select either Tabular or Vertical. What is the thinking in
using "Vertical" to describe that particular layout?
It seems to me and many of my customers that the layout is Horizontal. The
field name is to the left of the field, resulting in a horizontal
orientation of field name to field value. The tabular layout results in
what I would call a vertical orientation. Perhaps some explanation would
help me be less confused about the terms being used here, or maybe the
layout description for Vertical should be changed to Horizontal.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The Vertical description refers to the field names in relation to each
other, assuming you place each field in the detail band in a vertical
line...
Field1: Data
Field2: Data
Field3: Data
The Tabular option means that the field names will be placed horizontally
across the top of the report (most likely in a header band).
Field1 Field2 Field3
-----------------------
Data Data Data
--
Regards,
Nico Cizik
Digital Metaphors
http://www.digital-metaphors.com
Nico Cizik
Digital Metaphors
http://www.digital-metaphors.com
to the paper rather than the orientation of the field names to their values.
Thanks for the explanation. :-)