Details
-
Type:
Bug
-
Status:
Open
-
Priority:
Major
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Affects Version/s: 1.1
-
Fix Version/s: 1.3
-
Component/s: None
-
Labels:None
Description
We have recently upgraded from 1.0 to 1.1 version of displaytag. Previously we could define column1 with group="1" and column2 with group="2" so that our grouping would have levels. When column1 changed groupings it would cause column2 to change, column2 could have multiple groupings for each group in column1.
This is better explained in the displaytag reference doc for group:
"The grouping level (starting at 1 and incrementing) of this column (indicates if successive contain the same values, then they should not be displayed). The level indicates that if a lower level no longer matches, then the matching for this higher level should start over as well. If this attribute is not included, then no grouping is performed."
This behavior is broken in 1.1, as the levels are not respected. col2 is grouping even when col1 is not. Here is an attempt at an example:
Correct 1.0 behavior:
Col1 (group="1") Col2 (group="2")
Omaha 50
Omaha (50 here is hidden by grouping)
Omaha 23
Omaha 22
Chicago 22 (22 here is shown because col1 changed values)
Chicago (22 here is hidden by grouping)
Chicago 42
Chicago 43
Incorrect behavior occurring in displaytag 1.1:
Col1 (group="1") Col2 (group="2")
Omaha 50
Omaha (50 here is hidden by grouping)
Omaha 23
Omaha 22
Chicago (22 here is incorrectly hidden even though col1 changed values)
Chicago (22 here is hidden by grouping)
Chicago 42
Chicago 43
This is better explained in the displaytag reference doc for group:
"The grouping level (starting at 1 and incrementing) of this column (indicates if successive contain the same values, then they should not be displayed). The level indicates that if a lower level no longer matches, then the matching for this higher level should start over as well. If this attribute is not included, then no grouping is performed."
This behavior is broken in 1.1, as the levels are not respected. col2 is grouping even when col1 is not. Here is an attempt at an example:
Correct 1.0 behavior:
Col1 (group="1") Col2 (group="2")
Omaha 50
Omaha (50 here is hidden by grouping)
Omaha 23
Omaha 22
Chicago 22 (22 here is shown because col1 changed values)
Chicago (22 here is hidden by grouping)
Chicago 42
Chicago 43
Incorrect behavior occurring in displaytag 1.1:
Col1 (group="1") Col2 (group="2")
Omaha 50
Omaha (50 here is hidden by grouping)
Omaha 23
Omaha 22
Chicago (22 here is incorrectly hidden even though col1 changed values)
Chicago (22 here is hidden by grouping)
Chicago 42
Chicago 43
Correct 1.0 behavior:
Col1 (group="1") Col2 (group="2")
Omaha 50
(Omaha hidden) (50 here is hidden by grouping)
(Omaha hidden) 23
(Omaha hidden) 22
Chicago 22 (22 here is shown because col1 changed values)
(Chicago hidden) (22 here is hidden by grouping)
(Chicago hidden) 42
(Chicago hidden) 43
Incorrect behavior occurring in displaytag 1.1:
Col1 (group="1") Col2 (group="2")
Omaha 50
(Omaha hidden) (50 here is hidden by grouping)
(Omaha hidden) 23
(Omaha hidden) 22
Chicago (22 here is incorrectly hidden even though col1 changed values)
(Chicago hidden) (22 here is hidden by grouping)
(Chicago hidden) 42
(Chicago hidden) 43