HTML Generator

Wed Jun 6 11:08:02 CDT 2007

I'm not sure moving QKView to any other platform is such an urgent issue.

The world (in my opinion) is moving to a multi-tiered approach anyways as
hardware costs drop.

Even here at EnCore, the approach is looking more like having and
application server (windows) and a database server (Windows, Unix, Linux).
If that was the model other would be using, the more that was put into the
windows version for presentation would be the biggest bang for the buck. By
still having QUICK/QTP and QUIZ on the database means I can offload some
maintenance tasks from the application server.

Ken

I still want something that puts a 4GL back in front of any 3GL for
development.......my wish list......I know.

Anyone else using this model?

  _____  

From: Deskin, Bob [mailto:Bob.Deskin at Cognos.COM] 
Sent: June 6, 2007 11:58 AM
To: Ken Langendock; powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
Subject: RE: HTML Generator

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,  <mailto:Bob.Deskin at cognos.com> Bob 
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/e0f36077/attachment.html