This portal is to open public enhancement requests against the products and services belonging to IBM Sustainability Software. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
See this idea on ideas.ibm.com
Report Builder is limited on the attributes it can take on a historical report; it's possible to use more attributes on a current mode. IBM Engineers often recommend the use of fields (like tags) when proving out a concept or supplementing the tool where the addition of a field has not yet matured. Good.
In our scenario, we use the tags field to distinguish certain artifacts where the category field cannot supply the information but there's no solid "an additional field should be this" option. For one such tag, we want to know the stats on how many artifacts were opened with that tag and how many were closed in any given month.
We CAN see the overall open artifacts and closed artifacts in a historical graph for some of the out of the box fields. It works well. We CANNOT use the tags field, even to filter down the artifacts going into this report.
In the current reports, we can use the tags field as a filter and get the accurate information for either/or but not both. This means we can filter on a tag and group by the creation date to see all the artifacts opened by month. However, if we want to see the comparison of artifacts that were closed in those same months with the same tag, we need to create a new report instead of adding this information to the report.
Please add the ability to group two or more artifacts by date in current reporting.
Idea priority | High |
Needed By | Yesterday (Let's go already!) |
By clicking the "Post Comment" or "Submit Idea" button, you are agreeing to the IBM Ideas Portal Terms of Use.
Do not place IBM confidential, company confidential, or personal information into any field.
* You might be right that this request is not unique to your company but this is the first time we have seen/received such a request.
* JRS primary focus moving forward is the LQE relational store and this is the area of future reporting investment. We expect DW to stay around for some time due to the large adoption, especially for historic metrics. Therefore, we suggest to start exploring/testing LQE rs in the future.
* Is this request for a Data Warehouse (DW) or Lifecycle Query Engine (LQE)?
* Is this request for a specific domain application, for example, Engineering Workflow Management (EWM)?
There are sometimes cases where JRS can not provide a report exactly as the user would like to have but there are usually alternatives. In this case, the suggestion would be to create two reports and display them on a dashboard side by side.