Improved support for recursive structures generating documents using MDD
As an Solution developer
I want to have the option of referencing heading numbers relative to a "level". To explain the idea further, if I set up a pattern, I want to be able to use "heading level", "heading level + 1", etc. in a manner which allows me to create depth depending on the depth of a tree I am walking through recursively. For instance, if I have a process tree of variable depth (not all branches are the same depth), I would want to stand at the some root/some level of the tree and generate a document for all the sub processes in that tree using self referencing patterns and incremental heading levels.
So That I can generate out documentation to various stake holders and possible eliminate the need for redundant work (i.e "if we put the information into MooD, we can make you a document which contains all the information you are used to, but you do not have to edit that document and the information in MooD in tandem.").
Benefits Easier to "sell" MooD solution to document oriented organisations.
Acceptance Criteria ability to generate recursive/tree-like structres to documents and increment the heading level without having to hardcode in a predefined set of levels.
Customer / Originator LFV
Priority Low
-
Hi Karl,
I think this is a wider problem with MDD and SATs. This reminds me of a continued discussion I had with the MooD development team over the past couple years ago with improving MDD and SATs.
I think we should suggest a workshop describing and reaching a consensus what we like to get as an end product with the MDD route with our customers.
Then work out the key features and paths to get us with the developers there would help tackle this bug bear i have with exporting UX and UI I generally have across the board with DOCx, PPTx and XLSx
-
@Joseph Lam: Agree! The "small" request is the above. The "big" request is to overhaul MDD (and the like) so that it has a more consistent behaviour and where I can more accurately represent the information I have stored in a repository. The latter has more challenging acceptance criteria to specify, though...
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
2 comments