PointsWell wrote:At present you can stretch a grid to the bottom of the screen, however to do so you have to specify how many records you return OR you can specify the height of the grid and have unlimited returns.
There is a logical inconsistency with this. If you stretch the grid to the bottom of the screen you cannot predict how big that area is going to be. On a large screen it may be 600px high, on a small screen it may be 300px. If you specify the number of records that suits a 300px high grid but then the user has a large screen then the grid will appear concatenated. Does that mean there are no more records? Yes you can use the navigator panel at the bottom, but also users are not logical and don't always pick up on cues like that.
This creates user uncertainty. How can a user tell that he needs to scroll the grid to check that there are not more records below. How does a user know that a fixed height screen contains more records or is just the records that are visible on screen?
this grid issue has always perplexed me.
If you show 100 records per page in a Query, then the user has to scroll way down the screen - which scrolls the headings & menus off the top.
If you show 100 records AND you set a Height, then aware nicely scrolls all recs inside the xxx height window. very cool... EXCEPT
I have to set the height of that scrolling region - and that varies by user and screen size? So it needs to be able to use a percent or "ALL THE WAY TO BOTTOM" and let it figure it our at runtime.