my goal is to create a cycle dimension with ALL dimension present in Qlikview file using system tabel $field.
I tried with $field or concat($field,'|') or concat($field,',') etc but no success.
I don't think that's possible even if you add the missing aggr() which is needed to create a dimension because it's then just a single dimension and not a cyclic group of multiple dimensions.
What's the aim behind of your question?
The aim is to have a table with an espression that can be calculate with any of the dimension,
Customer , Nation, Area ... without need to list the dimension in the definition of cyclical group.
You could use something like:
as Dimension and then toggling between the various fields with a listbox with $Field and the enabled option of show only one value.
Your screenshot don't show a cyclic dimension else the properties from an inputbox with predefined values … which kind of calculations and views should be done with the $Field and which couldn't be reached with the mentioned listbox-approach or with just with "normal" objects?
Thank you for the reply.
Yes, with the input box I set four variables used to set 4 dimensions that the user can choose to have a "quadrant" (see attached file) of his business. It's simple and useful because I do not have to list ALL the dimension of the qlikview schema in the predefined values, potentially interesting the user, and it is dynamics if the schema changes.
My question, is possible to create a cyclic dimension containing ALL the dimension , more or less in the same way I have in the drop down list box?
I don't think that's possible to create such a cyclic dimension group directly with the native features. You may be able to do it with macros but probably it won't be very easy.
More common to the use of variables to enable dynamically views (dimensions as well as expressions) is the use of extra dimensions/expression-fields within one or more loosen tables in the datamodel which are then displayed as listboxes in the UI to control what the charts should be showing.
There are various postings here within the community which cover this topic. But this means also that you need to predefine in some way what should be available. Personally I would go even further I say you should always take the efforts to predefine which views are available/possible - the attempt to automate it and/or to simplify it isn't only expensive in the development it will also have more disadvantages as benefits for the user if there objects which show anything useless or even wrong because without carefully testing all views you couldn't ensure that everything worked.
It would be great if you can close out the thread by marking one of Marcus' replies as the solution or write up what you ended up deciding to do and then use the Accept as Solution button on that post to mark it and close the thread. It is greatly appreciated if you do close out the thread rather than leaving it open.