Automatic description when dragging files to workspace

[aehrenworth]

A feature that I find missing more and more from using Alteryx is when you dragged a file to the workarea it would automatically put the file name in the comment/description underneath the tool (instead of defaulting to “Add Comment” / blank. You could then replace it with whatever you wanted but it would at least give you a reference right away.

This feature does not appear to be available in 5.3.2 for KNIME.

[ipazin]

Hello there @aehrenworth,

totally agree with you. I like to have my flows documented and adding comment/label (file name) under File Readers helps once you get back to it after a while. Not to mention if you are working in a bigger organization and you are sharing workflows - in this case standardized node comments mean a lot. I would even go a step or two further and suggest a automatic comment for every node. Here are couple of comment rules I follow:

• File Readers (regardless of configuration method) to feature a file name
• File Writers also to have a file name
• DB Reader node to be without comment (and every other node I find obvious enough like Concatenate, Column Appender, Table Manipulator…)
• DB Connectors to have hostname and database name
• String Manipulation to have expression (if not to big; in that case either meaningful column name or couple of words on operation)
• Column Filter to have list of included columns (in case it’s too big then either empty or list of excluded column if small and can help)
• …

This helps me “read” workflow in general faster and some node specifics without going into node configuration. Of course I understand that this features would require some development and time as there are many many nodes…

Another step would be to besides default node commenting there is customized commenting where user or organization can setup rules for specific nodes or a set of nodes if not satisfied with default.

If I read well there is similar request here:

Reference Values in Node Comments and Annotations

It would be wonderful if we could place variables in the node comments so that they dynamically change based on the node’s state. So writing “This node has $$ROWCOUNT$$ records” would place “This node has 100 records” in the comment under the node at runtime. Example variables… $$ROWCOUNT$$ - Default first output $$ROWCOUNT(1)$$ - Count from selected output $$SUM(Fieldname)$$ - Sum total of field x $$MEAN(Fieldname)$$ - Average of field x $$MIN(Fieldname)$$ - Minimum of field x $$MAX(Fieldna…

And there is some development on this matter here so check if it can help:

using variable to change the label of a node.

simple question. can you use a variable in a node (eg name of the table read, the formula for a transform) to dynamically change the commentfield that is underneath? so its easier to see at glance what is happening?

Br,
Ivan

[HaveF]

@ipazin

Here are couple of comment rules I follow:

• File Readers (regardless of configuration method) to feature a file name
• File Writers also to have a file name
• DB Reader node to be without comment (and every other node I find obvious enough like Concatenate, Column Appender, Table Manipulator…)
• DB Connectors to have hostname and database name
• String Manipulation to have expression (if not to big; in that case either meaningful column name or couple of words on operation)
• Column Filter to have list of included columns (in case it’s too big then either empty or list of excluded column if small and can help)
• …

Hi, @ipazin , nice comments.

I am thinking of a more general function. Imagine that when we select a node, right-click and select “Generate Node Comment”, a short comment will be automatically generated for this node.

In fact, I believe this should be very easy to do in Gen AI days.

[ipazin]

Tnx @HaveF,

@HaveF

I am thinking of a more general function. Imagine that when we select a node, right-click and select “Generate Node Comment”, a short comment will be automatically generated for this node.

For some nodes, and some people, this would probably be a good option but in general I’m afraid that the comments/labels wouldn’t be standardized and thus “reading” this workflows would be hard and again rely on exploring node configuration. Having some kind of combination of rule based and Gen AI generated labels would be interesting to see.

Br,
Ivan

[HaveF]

@ipazin

For some nodes, and some people, this would probably be a good option but in general I’m afraid that the comments/labels wouldn’t be standardized and thus “reading” this workflows would be hard and again rely on exploring node configuration. Having some kind of combination of rule based and Gen AI generated labels would be interesting to see.

I agree. Comments should have different standards for different people.

Rule based comments just like few shots in Gen AI prompt.