Forum Discussion
New Card Visual bug: not showing same data (measures...) added multiple times?
- 2 years ago
Hi Anonymous and ChiragGarg2512 ,
I want to have something like this:
# customers # invited % invited # customers # buying % buying The workaround you both suggested came to my mind as well, and will work.
But the need to create yet another measure (=clutter!) was what bothered me. Especially when you expect the New Card Visual to work like the Multi-row Card visual (both Card-type visuals).
It might not be a "bug" (what's in a name), but I don't see why it couldn't work in a similar way.
My main point was signaling the latter.
Checked, and this is happening with the new card visual but would not qualify as a bug.
It does not work as I expect it to work.
And it does not work as a similar visual (Multi-row Card).
What is missing so that this would qualify as a bug 🙂 ?
- ChiragGarg25122 years agoSolution Sage
A Bug means that it is not functioning as it was programmed to. Currently, it doesn't have a feature that a different visual in the same category possesses.
What can be done as a workaround is to create another measure with the same formula but a different name. After putting the measure in the visual rename it.
- Anonymous2 years agoNot applicable
ChiragGarg2512 Thanks for your contribution on this thread.
Hi ddk ,
I tested it down to the same result as you. May I ask you why you put the same measure twice on the card? If you do need to, it is recommended that you create another new measure using the same formula and then place this new measure on the new card.
Best Regards
- ddk2 years agoAdvocate III
Hi Anonymous and ChiragGarg2512 ,
I want to have something like this:
# customers # invited % invited # customers # buying % buying The workaround you both suggested came to my mind as well, and will work.
But the need to create yet another measure (=clutter!) was what bothered me. Especially when you expect the New Card Visual to work like the Multi-row Card visual (both Card-type visuals).
It might not be a "bug" (what's in a name), but I don't see why it couldn't work in a similar way.
My main point was signaling the latter.