@ Peter Presnell, Bas van Gestel
I don't understand, why my suggestion is bad? It would be possible to assign for categories their own images.

The twistie is a navigation element. It would be extremely confusing for users, if a navigation element like this, would look different for different categories. It's already possible to choose an image of your own as the twistie image.

> The twistie is a navigation element. It would be extremely confusing for users,
> if a navigation element like this, would look different for different categories.
We have different twistie-like images for 'Views', 'Folders', 'Archive', 'Service' outline items in mail database. It not confuse users.
> It's already possible to choose an image of your own as the twistie image.
From designer's help:
This twistie image formula uses the image resource folder.gif if the current user is not a manager in the current database.
@If(!@Contains(@DbManager; @UserName); "folder.gif"; "")

I don't understand, for what it is necessary to show different images to different users. It is useless ability.
To show different images for different categories in some cases will make view more evident for users.

Oh, nobody understands me. Suppose, there is a view categorized by documents types (about 5-20 types). It would be evident to show definite images for definite types.

I like the concept. But I agree with the others that the twistie should not be used for this purpose. I haven't taken the time to test this, but you should be able to categorize the column that displays an icon. That is good enough. Customizing the interface by modifying the navigation makes it inconsistent and therefore less intuitive. Peter mentions that you can choose a different image for the twistie, but I don't even recommend doing that. Read the book "Don't make me think" for more on this subject.

@ David Hablewitz
I tried your suggestion. The categorized column that displays an icon don't show twistie at all. It don't show any text also.
I don't understand, the twistie image formula if it cannot be used what for is necessary? For the simple customization there would be enough a simple field with the image name.

I see the merit of increased programmability almost without prejudice - I don't buy the argument that the the platform should have certain limits to enforce application and UI level design principles, set according to some politburo at some particular point in time. You want an application who's twisties switch between a cat and a dog? No problem, it's your app, your company.

Therefore I like the idea, but can't see it working architecturally because a category represents a set of documents, not a single document. Which document do you want to run the formula against for the single twistie representing a set of documents?

Even if you *could* use the SELECT statement in the formula, and 'promise' that your SELECT Is only going to return one document, this is highly quirky use of the SELECT statement, and a performance nightmare for a view.

@ Mark Demicoli
> a category represents a set of documents, not a single document.
> Which document do you want to run the formula against for the single twistie representing a set of documents?

I want to use the same values as in categorized column (e.g. programmatical name).
I want to have ability to write twistie image formula like
@If(Type = "Group"; "group.gif"; Type = "Person"; "person.gif"; Type = "Server"; "server.gif", "default.gif");
for a categoriezed by field "Type" view.

@0 You may find that once you get a consensus on your articulated point that others like, you may need to withdraw this idea and resubmit it anew. I concur on the twistie usage. Know that those which have voted and not commented will mostly likely not return for a vote change. I add this as there seems to be some confusion as to what you implied and what others inferred. Good luck.

What I've done before, just like David, is leave the twisties (or don't show them), and make the categorized column itself an image.