LJG
asked on
Treeview - Nodes without parent nodes
>>>If<<<
In the below tree view I only brought in two children of the Root (Red arrows)
Level-1-A
Level-1-C
and I >>did not<< bring in:
Level-1-B (Green arrow)- but I messed up and brought in all the children (Blue arrows), grandchildren etc of Level-1-B
The Questions:
1) It appears it doesn't hurt anything if I do bring in the children etc of Level-1-B. They just don't show. (I understand it will take longer to load the tree because of my mistake)
2) Is the data anyplace in the tree or does the tree control just ignore the data?
TreeSample.bmp
In the below tree view I only brought in two children of the Root (Red arrows)
Level-1-A
Level-1-C
and I >>did not<< bring in:
Level-1-B (Green arrow)- but I messed up and brought in all the children (Blue arrows), grandchildren etc of Level-1-B
The Questions:
1) It appears it doesn't hurt anything if I do bring in the children etc of Level-1-B. They just don't show. (I understand it will take longer to load the tree because of my mistake)
2) Is the data anyplace in the tree or does the tree control just ignore the data?
TreeSample.bmp
Dale Fye
There would be no way to "bring in" the Level 2-B nodes, because there would be no parent node to assign them to, and you must assign them to either the Root or to another node.
ASKER
fyed:
Thanks for the response. The reason I ask the question is that I have a treeview with 5 levels and by mistake I limited level 2 but didn't limit the children nodes.
I thought I would get an error, or data on the tree would be wrong - neither happened.
So it would appear to me the treeview takes care of my mistake and just disregards the extra data - no harm no foul. (with the exception of increased loading time)
So the question - is the above statement correct or am I missing something?
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
Thanks for the response. The reason I ask the question is that I have a treeview with 5 levels and by mistake I limited level 2 but didn't limit the children nodes.
I thought I would get an error, or data on the tree would be wrong - neither happened.
So it would appear to me the treeview takes care of my mistake and just disregards the extra data - no harm no foul. (with the exception of increased loading time)
So the question - is the above statement correct or am I missing something?
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
I still don't understand what you mean by "I limited level 2 but didn't limit the children nodes"
Can you post the code you are using, or better yet, a copy of your database with just the applicable data, form(s) and code?
Can you post the code you are using, or better yet, a copy of your database with just the applicable data, form(s) and code?
ASKER
The code does a lot so let's see if I can do a better job of explaining. Hopefully if you look at the graphic, the below makes sense.
A) So if I bring in the Root then run query 1 through 5 I get the original graphic.
B) If I run everything the same as -A- but in step -1- below the query only brings in
Level-1-A
Level-1-C
I don't bring in Level-1-B in step -1- but I bring in all the children and grand children in steps 2 thru 5 that should go under Level-1-B. I get the below graphic.
So it would appear to me the treeview takes care of my mistake and just disregards the extra data - no harm no foul. (with the exception of increased loading time)
Thanks again for your time.
LJG
--------------- Below is the process ----------------
0) Bring in Root (I'll call this Level-0) We now have Root
1) Run a query that brings in the below to the tree under Root (I'll call this Level-!)
Level-1-A
Level-1-B
Level-1-C
2) Run a query that brings in the below to the tree (I'll call this Level-2)
Level-2-B (Under Level-1-A)
Level-2-B (Under Level-1-B)
Level-2-A
Level-2-A
Nothing comes in under Level1-C
3) Run a query that brings in the below to the tree (I'll call this Level-3)
Level-3-B (Under Level-2-B)
4) Run query to bring in Level-4
Level-4-B (Under Level-2-B)
5) Run query to bring in Level-5
Level-5-Data_1 (Under Level-4-B)
Level-5-Data_2
Level-5-Data_3
Level-5-Data_4
A) So if I bring in the Root then run query 1 through 5 I get the original graphic.
B) If I run everything the same as -A- but in step -1- below the query only brings in
Level-1-A
Level-1-C
I don't bring in Level-1-B in step -1- but I bring in all the children and grand children in steps 2 thru 5 that should go under Level-1-B. I get the below graphic.
So it would appear to me the treeview takes care of my mistake and just disregards the extra data - no harm no foul. (with the exception of increased loading time)
Thanks again for your time.
LJG
--------------- Below is the process ----------------
0) Bring in Root (I'll call this Level-0) We now have Root
1) Run a query that brings in the below to the tree under Root (I'll call this Level-!)
Level-1-A
Level-1-B
Level-1-C
2) Run a query that brings in the below to the tree (I'll call this Level-2)
Level-2-B (Under Level-1-A)
Level-2-B (Under Level-1-B)
Level-2-A
Level-2-A
Nothing comes in under Level1-C
3) Run a query that brings in the below to the tree (I'll call this Level-3)
Level-3-B (Under Level-2-B)
4) Run query to bring in Level-4
Level-4-B (Under Level-2-B)
5) Run query to bring in Level-5
Level-5-Data_1 (Under Level-4-B)
Level-5-Data_2
Level-5-Data_3
Level-5-Data_4
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I either asked the question wrong or no one has an answer