Product Idea

Expand all | Collapse all

Additional Filter Logic- "is NOT within the last"..

  • 1.  Additional Filter Logic- "is NOT within the last"..

    Posted 03-12-2019 12:52
    We need the ability to see "aging" request and currently, the filter logic does not allow for us to filter on items that are "older" than a certain time frame, unless we use "is on or before", but with that, we have to keep updating the selected date.  We would like to recommend adding "is not within the last" as an option with time frames as in, 7 days, 30 days etc.

    When we first were on boarding with Jama, our Jama consultant had indicated they submitted this as a feature request, but i couldn't find it anywhere and was wondering if it has been considered.

    jama feature request

    Laura Cornelison
    System Administration
    Providence Health Plan
    Beaverton OR

  • 2.  RE: Additional Filter Logic- "is NOT within the last"..

    Posted 10-25-2019 12:39
    Edited by Chloe Elliott 10-25-2019 12:39
    I am going to add this informative and supporting thread: Negating filter result to this Product Idea.

    Hi Laura!


    Chloe Elliott
    Jama Software
    Portland OR

  • 3.  RE: Additional Filter Logic- "is NOT within the last"..

    Posted 10-25-2019 13:21
    Hi Chloe,
    per your request, I copy here my suggestion & use case:

    I do believe that, a next to "All" and "Any", a "None" filtering condition is needed.
    For example I'm trying to filter items that have only 1 upstream relationship to a defined item type.
    I don't see how to do else than inverting a filter for "Number of upstream relationship = 1" AND "Has upstream of defined type".

    Actually it's very easy to generate may good use cases.
    This is because Boolean algebra has 3 basic operators (AND, OR, NOT) while only 2 are provided in Jama (AND via All, OR via "Any"); the missing NOT operator could be added as "according to NONE of the following conditions".

    Note that my request is more generic than Laura's one, since she was just asking (no offense) to get an single statement inversion as Jama provides for may other statements. That approach is compact for simple filters but will always remain limited to one statement. It will never replace the need of a "NOT" operator at higher combination level.

    Related request (not replacing the main request):
    - Add a way to easily invert the active filter (Proposal: Add in the hide-able "Filter Items" a "Invert" checkbox.)

    Christian Binard
    ON semiconductor