HTML Generator

Wed Jun 6 10:58:13 CDT 2007

Take a deep breath Ken :-)

QKView is like a simple terminal emulator. While we don't like the term
screen scraper, it's is similar. In other words, it traps QUICK's output
that normally goes to the Command Console in Windows, and puts out a
somewhat prettier picture. User input is sent to QUICK just like on a
terminal. However, there are no individual controls. We can make it look
prettier with etched line drawing and colours. Function keys work as
well as any of the other QUICK UI features, but it is not Windows and it
is not a browser interface.

We are looking at extending this model (i.e. we're only thinking about
it) to other platforms and with etched fields. We may even add
character-style radio buttons and checkboxes a la DOS.

Because QKView works on top of QUICK, there's no change in internal
architecture. Nor is there a change in the underlying QDESIGN code other
than possibly whether you want your OS command calls to appear or not.

Moving to an HTML interface is different. I don't see the QDESIGN
generation as a major issue.

What I'm concerned about is how the execution engine would run. We won't
be re-writing QUICK. So a true Windows-like event-driven approach is a
non-starter. I have no problem with removing the Action field. You can
already to that in QUICK as long as you provide a way to get the actions
in.

But QUICK operates on a pre-determined sequence. That's why Axiant
became so complex when field processing mode was introduced as opposed
to panel mode. If you click a field in Axiant, we have to generate the
equivalent QUICK commands to get from where the current focus is to
where the clicked field is. We do not have the resources to recreate
that, nor do we want to. Moving from PowerHouse to Axiant usually
requires an application architecture change, just as moving to
PowerHouse Web does.

I want something that lets you simply recompile your existing code with
minimal or no changes (possibly some global SET statements) and run it
in the new interface.

So the question again is, if I generate HTML, and I want to use QUICK
much as it already is, what do I use as the client?

Bob

	-----Original Message-----
	From: powerh-l-bounces+bob.deskin=cognos.com at lists.sowder.com
[mailto:powerh-l-bounces+bob.deskin=cognos.com at lists.sowder.com] On
Behalf Of Ken Langendock
	Sent: June 6, 2007 11:36 AM
	To: powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
	Subject: RE: HTML Generator

	Ok I think this is getting confusing.

	What Bob is referring to is a Browser version of quick...Axiant
would be compared to a Client server version, which is more like what
QKView is in my opinion.

	Bob, you are correct, an INTRANET version is what we need now
more than anything. If you want to make an internet
product/module....use PHWEB, but keep the in-house stuff in the new
product.

	What I was getting at was Qdesign generating very robust HTML
syntax (on steroids if you will). 
	(Or better yet...remove the character based screen code from
QUICK all together and replace it with a browser interface on the
Windows version).

	That would mean:
	- Screen Activity statements would generate buttons for Entry,
Find, Change, Delete at the top of the screen.
	- Function key statements would generate buttons on the bottom
of the screen.
	- Select box statements would automatically put a dropdown
indicator beside a field.
	- Cluster statements would/could attach to a control
	- A new option to create an icon for Selection/Lookup screens
beside a field.

	- oh my, I am getting excited....woohoo

________________________________

	From:
powerh-l-bounces+ken.langendock=rogers.com at lists.sowder.com
[mailto:powerh-l-bounces+ken.langendock=rogers.com at lists.sowder.com] On
Behalf Of Joe Boyle
	Sent: June 6, 2007 10:22 AM
	To: Deskin, Bob; powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
	Subject: Re: HTML Generator

	I think that users want the interface to look and feel just like
Windows rather than quick; I remember one chap calling me to complain
that he could'nt get Axiant to work the same way that VB did. Younger
people now do the data entry and they are all used to the style of
Windows. I found that they are always amused at how quick screens work,
and were always phased by the function of the action field.

		----- Original Message ----- 
		From: Deskin, Bob <mailto:Bob.Deskin at cognos.com>  
		To: powerh-l at lists.sowder.com 
		Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:19 PM
		Subject: HTML Generator

		Now that we have put the E version to bed (it's in
manufacturing but not quite available yet), we're busy planning the next
release. We have lost of ideas of course, and I'm not specifically
soliciting any more. What I would like to do is follow up on Ken's idea,
which we share, of an HTML generator. We already know that QDESIGN can
generate HTML. And it's not particularly difficult to add to that. I'm
not trying to make it sound like it's a 5 minute job, but we already
know how to do it. It's simply a case of designing the keyword and
determining what HTML should be generated and where.

		But I don't think people want PowerHouse Web with it's
panel-oriented stateless architecture that requires converting subscreen
calls to linkscreens and some other way of handling reports and runs. My
take is that people want is something that feels like QUICK (even down
to the Action field is desired) but looks like a web page. And that it
runs over a local network similar to a terminal emulator as opposed to
the internet (although that might be a possibility). So the first
question is - is that a correct assumption?

		If that is correct, then the next question is how do we
do the execution end of things in a reasonable period of time with
limited resources. Sure, it can be done. The browser engines are
available as controls or applets and we could build the entire
infrastructure, but we don't have a large team and 2 or more years.
Rather we have 2 or 3 people and 6 months (no, that's not the whole team
but we do have other things to do, and the 6 months is what I'm aiming
for because I know these projects take longer).

		So does anyone have any ideas on how to put this sort of
thing together? Are there web sites that describe it? Is it even
reasonable considering that a browser is typically block oriented
whereas QUICK is field oriented?

		Any thoughts? 

		Bob

		PS I removed the other portions of Ken's message because
I won't get into pricing policy in a public forum. Ken's 3rd point is
somewhat dependant on the success of the second. These days, you need to
look good to be noticed. However, whatever we do must be in keeping with
our existing architecture. QKView is a step in the right direction.

			-----Original Message-----
			From:
powerh-l-bounces+bob.deskin=cognos.com at lists.sowder.com
[mailto:powerh-l-bounces+bob.deskin=cognos.com at lists.sowder.com] On
Behalf Of Ken Langendock
			Sent: June 5, 2007 6:29 PM
			To: powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
			Subject: FW: Is Powerhouse expanding in India

			<< portions removed by Bob Deskin >>

			 b) The most important thing would be something
NEW
			Maybe Some kind of "controllable/", HTML code
generator from the compiler, similar to how access statements get
generated into cursor statements. If we are not happy with the way the
automatic one works, we can create our own. If we could create copy
modules that would generate the correct HTML syntax to make the, for
example, screen headers work/look as they do in Quick, this would cut a
lot of code down.
			Function key statements that create proper HTML
code, etc.

			The list can go on and on, but the point is, we
need a way of converting our existing quick screens into fancy/schmancy
html screens automatically. I for one am not looking at converting 2000+
quick screens into HTML without some "automatic" help.

			Ken

________________________________

			From: Joe Boyle [mailto:atla38 at dsl.pipex.com] 
			Sent: June 5, 2007 5:58 PM
			To: 'Ken Langendock'; powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
			Subject: RE: Is Powerhouse expanding in India

			 I think PH is failing ( read dead) because
PowerHouse is so expensive - especially training - all of the MS .net
related software can be downloaded for free - I have MSSQLserver, C#,
C++, VB and it did,nt cost me a penny. 

			When I tried to purchase PH software (for NT
platforms only), Cognos wouldn't sell it me as an individual ( and that,
after I worked on the Cognos support desk for 5 years) with 12 years of
PH on VMS, MPE, Unix and Dos collectively.

		     This message may contain privileged and/or
confidential information.  If you have received this e-mail in error or
are not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, disseminate or
distribute it; do not open any attachments, delete it immediately from
your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail that you have done
so.  Thank you. 

________________________________

		-- 
		= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
		Mailing list: powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
		Subscribe: &quot;subscribe&quot; in message body to
powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
		Unsubscribe: &quot;unsubscribe &lt;password&gt;&quot; in
message body to powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
		http://lists.sowder.com/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
		This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must
be a subscriber.
		Add 'site:lists.sowder.com powerh-l' to your search
terms to search the list archive at Google.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sowder.com/pipermail/powerh-l/attachments/20070606/ab60390d/attachment.html