Hi, On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Dave Page <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Khushboo Vashi > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> - Owner and schema should be allowed to be left blank (and then default > >>> to the current user/schema) > > > > Done > > Oh, sorry - that design changed a while back, and I've updated all the > existing nodes already. I thought I'd mentioned that. All we do now is > pre-set the default values for those two fields. > I have done in this way only. Sorry for the misunderstanding. > >>> - When adding constraints, I should be able to type directly into the > >>> grid. Expanding the row should be optional. > > > > I have made the grid non-editable explicitly as the Check constraint > control > > is multi-line control and right now there is no support in the grid for > the > > multi-line control. > > Not sure I follow - the mockup design you sent months ago allowed you > to type into the grid, and expand a row to show all fields if you > wanted. That is an *absolutely essential* feature enhancement for > pgAdmin 4 - it's required by the table design (though this will change > a little in other ways, like positioning of the expand row button), > and should be used here: > > https://www.lucidchart.com/documents/edit/610ce42d-c397-48ff-a5e7-bd92c4995715/0 > > All other controls other than text-area are supported in back-grid. I will try to incorporate text-area as well, so we can directly type into the grid for this control also. > >>> - The comment column on the constraints grid expands when the text > >>> reaches ~50% of the width. It should be a fixed size (and use 100% of > the > >>> space available, less appropriate margins) > > > > I have applied the size for the each header of the grid, but if the given > > input will be without space in the grid then it will expand. For this, we > > can make table layout fixed. So, please suggest, should I do that or not? > > Yes, I think it should be fixed. If the grid row is expanded, > presumably it'll show in a multi-line field anyway? Plus the > properties will use a multi-line field as well. > > Okay. > -- > Dave Page > Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com > Twitter: @pgsnake > > EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >
