Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!
Submission GuidelinesHello,
After used the new "Image Recognition Tool" a few days, I think you could improve it :
> by adding the dimensional constraints in front of each of the pre-trained models,
> by adding a true tool to divide the training data correctly (in order to have an equivalent number of images for each of the labels)
> at least, allow the tool to use black & white images (I wanted to test it on the MNIST, but the tool tells me that it necessarily needs RGB images) ?
Question : do you in the future allow the user to choose between CPU or GPU usage ?
In any case, thank you again for this new tool, it is certainly perfectible, but very simple to use, and I sincerely think that it will allow a greater number of people to understand the many use cases made possible thanks to image recognition.
Thank you again
Kévin VANCAPPEL (France ;-))
Thank you again.
Kévin VANCAPPEL
When creating annotations in the new image template tool as part of intelligence suite, a feature improvement would be the ability to modify the annotation, to change the dimensions of it.
Currently the only option is to cancel and redraw but being able to edit and drag the existing annotation would be a great addition. This is because the sizing and position of the annotation is important in the OCR process, and when there are many annotations on a page a user is likely to only need to make minor adjustments instead of deleting and redrawing. A mock up is below.
Sounds simple :
Best regards,
Simon
I think the undo/redo capabilities in Alteryx could be greatly improved. Here is an idea that I think would be beneficial...
I'd like to see which exact tools are affected by my undo/redo actions. An idea was suggested a couple years ago to move your location on the canvas, but that was not added to the roadmap. Instead, is it possible to add the tool ID to the undo menu so that it is obvious which tool each line is detailing?
This is the current debug menu that shows your previous actions:
When a tool is created, the ID can be displayed in this menu, but this is not shown when a change is made to an existing tool. My suggestion is that the menu would say:
4. Change Sort (3) Properties
This same change should be made in the Edit dropdown menu.
In order to make it easier to find workflow logs and be able to analyze them we would suggest some changes:
This would facilitate when trying to find the job logs.
To facilitate reading the log we would suggest the following changes:
For the example of current and suggested log:
Please consult the document in attachment.
In the suggested format the log would be [TIMESTAMP] [ERRORLEVEL] [ELAPSEDTIME] [MESSAGE]
The interactive results pane is great, but wouldn't it be cool if you could interact directly with the result pane to do things like filtering.
There are a few too many steps with the method at the moment, where you need to either copy the value or type it into the filter pop up. A simple right click and filter on selected value would be a big ux improvement.
With the new keyboard shortcuts in 2021.1, I would love to see this same functionality added to the global search. I would like for
1) The global search bar to be accessible via a keyboard shortcut
2) You can navigate through the results with the arrow keys and
3) I can click enter on a tool and it will add it to the canvas just like the tool palette now functions in 21.1.
cc: @A11yKyle
Hello,
In cases where more than one field is being used in a join, the "Join (Tool ID) String fields can only be joined to other string fields" error message could be improved by indicating which field has a mismatch.
For example, if I'm joining Fields A, B, C, D... to fields Z, Y, X, W... in Join tool 24, and for some reason Field Z gets changed from String to Double, it'd be nice to see a message like:
"Join (24) (Field 1) String Fields can only be joined to other String fields"
or
"Join (24) String Fields can only be joined to other String fields (A)"
So that I know I need to go to a select tool and change the type of either A or Z.
Otherwise I look at the Join tool output and try to figure out which pair no longer has matching types, which can take a minute when dealing with a multiple-point join.
Thank you!
The Dynamic Input tool fails when attempting input a set of Excel files with the following error:
Error: Dynamic Input (1): The file "Test2.xlsx|||<List of Sheet Names>" has a different schema than the 1st file in the set.
Each spreadsheet contains two tabs and all tabs contain the same columns.
The root cause of the schema error is that maximum sheet name length in the two spreadsheets is different. The first spreadsheet uses "East" and "West" for sheet names. The second spreadsheet uses "North" and "South" for sheet names. The Dynamic Input tool uses the longest sheet name when defining the effective Schema.
Excel limits sheet name length to 31 characters. It would be helpful if the Dynamic Input tool used 31 as the minimum string length when defining a schema from Excel sheet names.
The Input Data tool exhibits similar behavior when using a wildcard in the filename and the "Import only the list of sheet names" option.
A batch macro can be used as a workaround.
Hello all,
The reasons why I would the cadence to be back to quarter release :
-for customers, a quarter cadence means waiting less time to profit of the Alteryx new features so more value
-quarter cadence is now an industry standard on data software.
-the new situation of special cadence creates a lot of frustration. And frustration is pretty bad in business.
-for partners, the new situation means less customer upgrade opportunities, so less cash but also less contacts with customers.
Best regards,
Simon
Good morning!
This may be a very simple thing, but would it be possible to add a DateTimeQuarter() function? We have DateTime Second, Minute, Day, Month, and Year, and being able to have an easy formula for the quarter as well would be incredibly convenient.
Thanks,
Kat
Apologies if this has been suggested already - did a search and didn't see anything similar.
This is a quality of life/UX idea. The search functionality in the results pane essentially does a 'contains' search on all of the columns (see below screenshots for the filter inserted by the 'apply data manipulations button). As I build workflows and profile the data, it'd be helpful if I could click one or more columns and limit the search bar to just those fields.
Right now, depending on the dataset I could get rows returned by the search due to the search term appearing in columns that aren't relevant. To workaround this I could add select tools to limit the columns or do more robust filters in a filter tool, but having it built in would be very helpful.
CI / CD is critical to any production level process, especially when multiple authors are contributing new features to the same workflow. Currently, multi-author editing of workflows is extremely difficult, and something that would be aided greatly by using git to control different branches of ongoing work. Luckily, that's something we can already do today! However, the ability to test before merging a pull request is critical to modern CI / CD pipelines. For this, it we need to be able to run a headless workflow from a CI / CD environment. Also, having the ability to pass in parameters to the workflow would allow for robust integration testing - something that isn't straightforward today without running on production environments.
Often I need to add filters or other tools early on after the workflow is already been mostly built. If a tool connects to one tool I can drag the filter over the connecting line and add the filter seamlessly. However in large workflows there is often this situation:
The Filter will only connect to one of the lines I'm hovering over. If I could connect to all lines simultaneously and drop in the connection to achieve this (would be awesome):
In workflow Constants, it would be really useful to be able to populate a new field associated with each user created constant.
E.g. Type, Name, Value, "Description"
The description could be left blank but also populated by workflow designers to attach commentary / business logic to the constant.
E.g. Type = User, Name = MyUserConstant, Value = 0.25, Description = "This describes the weighting factor used in Product Calculations"
When I select multiple containers using control. I can see the configuration pane still on the left. If I adjust anything there it will only adjust the last selected container. I would like it to adjust all selected containers.
As @Jonathan-Sherman pointed out in his blog post we love that the toolbar is back in version 2020.2!
One way that this toolbar could be enhanced, however, is to allow the use of the save button while a workflow is running. The user can still click File->Save while the workflow is running, but it would be quicker to be able to use the button on the toolbar.
We have lots of tools that create new column(s) from the Inputs, e.g., Generate Rows. It'd be very nice if the new column(s) is/are highlighted in the Output. This makes it a lot easier for users when developing the workflow.
It would be great if we could add example workflows to our macros, accessible in the same way as from the original tools (example hyperlink shown after single-clicking on a tool in the tool palette or when searching in the search bar).
There is a post on how to do it for custom tools How to add an example link in the custom tool (alteryx.com). The way described there has limitations and does not seem to work on macros: I was able to get the link to show up, but nothing happens when I click.
My suggestion, make it easy to add an example workflow to a macro, like it is to change the logo or add a help link.
We will not be enabling DCM for the time being (see https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Desktop-Ideas/Enable-auto-complete-predictive-typi...).
But, when you do not enable DCM, you get an annoying pop up every time you open Designer that says "DCM toggle is not enabled".
Please give us the ability to turn this pop up off.
Changing the Macro Input tool in an existing macro is dangerous and can result in unmapped fields or lost connections in workflows using the macro. For example, we have a widely used macro for which we'd like to change the name of an input field, change it's default type from Date to DateTime, make it optional while keeping other fields mandatory. Currently, we cannot find a solution which would not require us to fix each workflow using the macro after changing it. We should be able to change the field names, field types (e.g. String to V_WString, Date to DateTime), select optional fields and do other modifications to Macro Input without having to update each workflow using the macro. The new Macro Input UI could be enhanced with a window similar to that of Select tool's. Technically, the Macro Input fields could have a unique ID by which they would be recognised in workflows, so the field names would just be aliases that could be changed without losing the mapping. In summary, we are restricted to our initial setup of Macro Input and it is very complicated to change it afterwards, especially if the macro is used widely.
Utilisateur | Compte |
---|---|
11 | |
9 | |
7 | |
7 | |
5 |