Skip to content

docs(spec): a report may declare user-set parameters - #41

Open
delchev wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/report-parameters
Open

docs(spec): a report may declare user-set parameters#41
delchev wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/report-parameters

Conversation

@delchev

@delchev delchev commented Aug 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Documents reports[].parameters — the report's own user-set inputs.

A report is usually read for a period, a threshold or a name the reader chooses. filter cannot express that: it is fixed when the report is generated. The construct declares the inputs, each bound into the report's WHERE.

  • docs/spec/presentation.md — a new Parameters subsection under reports: the key table (name / target / op / type / initial), the bound-on-every-read contract that makes initial the value the untouched report shows, which comparisons carry a neutral "any value" default (a date bound, a like search) and which must declare one (eq, a numeric bound), the whole-day semantics of a timestamp target, the null-value behaviour while an input is empty, and what a target may be.
  • docs/reference.md — the reports snippet and the capability table row.

Proposal: IntentFile/intent-specification (linked from the spec PR). Reference implementation: eclipse-dirigible/dirigible#6911.

Left open for review rather than merged.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

A report is usually read for a period, a threshold or a name the reader
chooses, and filter is fixed when the report is generated. Documents
reports[].parameters on the presentation page and in the reference: the
key table, the bound-on-every-read contract that makes initial the value
the untouched report shows, which comparisons carry a neutral default and
which must declare one, and what a target may be.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant