用于对数据库执行查询和报告的用户友好/非技术 RAD 工具的想法
我正在研究一种工具，允许用户以用户友好的方式对数据库执行查询以提取数据和创建报告。
主要要求是我们无法知道用户将要执行的查询。因此，我们需要设计一个灵活的 UI，允许他们以非技术方式进行指定。
我的问题是：你知道有什么工具可以做类似的事情吗？您有一些鼓舞人心的用户界面吗？
I am investigating for a tool that allows a user to perform in a user friendly way queries to database for extracting datas and creating reports.
Primary requirement is that we can't know queries users are going to do. So we need to design a flexible UI allowing them to specify in a non technical way.
My question is: do you know any tool that does something similar? Have you some inspiring user interface?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
为了获得灵感，我知道有五种既定方法：
属性列表。对于给定的表，您（设计者）提供用户为其指定查询属性值的所有属性的列表。有时用户还指定运算符（例如，Like、<、> 等）；否则它会由您根据数据类型进行修复（字符串使用 Like，数字和日期属性使用范围）。属性之间的所有条件均通过逻辑 AND 组合。如果允许用户列出单个属性的值，它们将通过逻辑 OR 连接。用户通常认为空白属性值意味着该属性不包含在标准中。通常，您指定用户可能主要感兴趣的表并硬连接连接。因为表、连接和布尔可能性是固定的，所以这限制了临时灵活性，但对于大多数情况来说它已经足够了。这是最常见的方法。
通过示例查询。用户选择他们想要查询的表，然后您提供一个空的多记录表单（例如网格），其中包含连接表的所有属性；也就是说，一个空的查询结果（在某些情况下，用户也选择要显示的属性）。用户填写属性值，就像它们是示例记录一样，其中假设空白属性会变化。因此，如果为同一记录输入优先级和状态值，则它们的属性将通过逻辑 AND 组合。如果它们输入到不同的记录中，则它们通过逻辑或组合。在某些情况下，用户还可以为每个属性指定运算符（例如，指定值的范围）。这提供了非常高的灵活性，并且对于用户来说似乎相对直观。
图解查询。 Tiziana Cararci 的按图查询方法允许用户通过图形化操作实体关系图来指定复杂的联接和布尔值。如需了解更多详情，请通过 Google 搜索：
Catarci T &桑图奇 G (1995)。图解与文本查询语言：比较实验。 IFIP 工作组的会议记录。 2.6 可视化数据库工作会议，（3 月）。
Catarci T、Costabile MF、Levialdi S 和巴蒂尼·C. (1997)。视觉查询系统：分析与比较。视觉语言与计算杂志，8(2), 215-260，（六月）。
图形过滤器查询。 Ben Shneiderman 的过滤流方法允许用户通过构建运算符和标准的可视网络、利用管道或电气隐喻来指定复杂的布尔值。谷歌搜索：
施奈德曼 B (1991)。用于信息探索的可视化用户界面。美国信息科学学会第 54 届年会论文集，28（华盛顿特区，10 月）。
Murray NS、Paton NW、Goble CA、Bryce J (2000)。 Kaleidoquery：一种基于流程的视觉语言及其评估。视觉语言与杂志计算，11(2), 151-189（四月）。
自然语言查询人们付出了很多努力尝试将自然语言或半自然语言解析为结构化查询，但并没有取得太大成功，部分原因是以下内容的模糊性：自然语言（例如，在“分配给英国和爱尔兰的所有销售人员的佣金收入”中，“和”可以解释为逻辑“或”或“与”）。您可以尝试返回多个结果（每种解释一个）供用户选择（有点像 Google）。这种方法对于不熟练的用户以及当足够而不是完全正确的结果就足够时可能就足够了。
For inspiration, there are five established approaches I know of:
Attribute List. For a given table, you (the designer) provide a list all attributes for which the user specifies the query attribute value. Sometimes the user also specifies the operators (e.g., Like, <, >, etc.); otherwise it’s fixed by you depending on the data type (strings use Like, numeric and date attributes use ranges). All criteria between attributes are combined by a logical AND. If you allow the user to list values for a single attribute, they are joined by a logical OR. Users generally assume that a blank attribute value implies that that attribute is not included in the criteria. Generally, you specify the table(s) that are likely to be of primary interest to users and hard-wire the Joins. Because the tables, joins, and Boolean possibilities are fixed, this has limited ad hoc flexibility, but for most cases it’s more than adequate. It’s the most common approach out there.
Query by Example. Users select the table(s) they want to query and you provide an empty multi-record form (e.g., grid) that includes all the attributes of the joined tables; that is, an empty query result (in some cases, the user selects the attributes to show too). The user completes the attribute values as if they were example records, where a blank attribute is assumed to vary. Thus, if Priority and Status values are entered for the same record, their attributes are combined by a logical AND. If they are entered on different records, they are combined by a logical OR. In some cases, the user may also specify operators for each attribute (e.g., to specify ranges of values). This provides a very high level of flexibility and seems to be relatively intuitive for users.
Diagrammatic Query. Tiziana Cararci’s Query by Diagram approach allows users to specify sophisticated Joins and Boolean by graphically manipulating an entity-relationship diagram. For more details, Google for:
Catarci T & Santucci G (1995). Diagrammatic Vs Textual Query Languages: A Comparative Experiment. Proceedings of the IFIP Work Group. 2.6 Working Conference on Visual Databases, (March).
Catarci T, Costabile M F, Levialdi S, & Batini C. (1997). Visual Query Systems: Analysis and Comparison. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 8(2), 215-260, (June).
Graphic Filter Query. Ben Shneiderman’s Filter Flow approach allows users to specify sophisticated Boolean by constructing visual networks of operators and criteria, leveraging a plumbing or electrical metaphor. Google for:
Shneiderman B (1991). Visual User Interfaces for Information Exploration. Proceeding of the 54th Annual Meeting of The American Society for Information Sciences, 28 (Washington, DC, October).
Murray NS, Paton NW, Goble CA, Bryce J (2000). Kaleidoquery: A flow-based visual language and its evaluation. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 11(2), 151-189 (April).
Natural Language Query There’s been a lot of effort to try to parse natural language or semi-natural language into a structured query, but it hasn’t had much success, partly due to the ambiguity of natural language (e.g., in “Commission income of all salespersons assigned to Great Britain and Ireland,” the “and” could be interpreted as either a logical OR or AND). You could try returning multiple results (one for each interpretation) for the user to choose (sort of like Google). This approach may be adequate for unskilled users and for when a sufficing rather than perfectly correct result is sufficient.
许多现代 Web 开发框架允许您从数据库制作脚手架。这些是包含增删改查操作的简单网页。您可以在其中搜索和浏览相关记录。
我个人见过 Linq2SQL for asp 和 Ruby on Rails 这样做。还有更多
Many modern web dev frameworks let you make scaffolds from your daabases. which are simple web pages containing crud operations. where you can search and browse related records.
I personally have seen Linq2SQL for asp and Ruby on rails doing that. there are many more
“用户友好”和“非技术方式”听起来像是临时报告。在这种情况下，您可以查看临时报告演示< /a>.但还有许多其他临时报告工具。
"user friendly" and "non technical way" sounds like Ad-Hoc reporting. In this case you can take a look in this Ad-Hoc reporting demo. But there are many other Ad-Hoc reporting tools.