Skip to Main Content
IBM Data and AI Ideas Portal for Customers

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Post your ideas

Post ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,

  1. Post an idea

  2. Upvote ideas that matter most to you

  3. Get feedback from the IBM team to refine your idea

Help IBM prioritize your ideas and requests

The IBM team may need your help to refine the ideas so they may ask for more information or feedback. The product management team will then decide if they can begin working on your idea. If they can start during the next development cycle, they will put the idea on the priority list. Each team at IBM works on a different schedule, where some ideas can be implemented right away, others may be placed on a different schedule.

Receive notification on the decision

Some ideas can be implemented at IBM, while others may not fit within the development plans for the product. In either case, the team will let you know as soon as possible. In some cases, we may be able to find alternatives for ideas which cannot be implemented in a reasonable time.

Additional Information

To view our roadmaps:

Reminder: This is not the place to submit defects or support needs, please use normal support channel for these cases

IBM Employees:

The correct URL for entering your ideas is:

Status Future consideration
Created by Guest
Created on Mar 6, 2019

Add in_reference_table check to Information Analyzer or allow variable to be bound to n-tuples instead of single fields

In Information Analyzer one can implement a reference check against only a single column using in_reference_column. But in many cases you need to check references against a set of columns. E.g. imagine  you need to implement a simple address check using city and postal code. If you have a reference table that contains all valid combinations of postal codes and cities (postCode, city). Currently you cannot implement this directly with a in_reference_column check as you can either check against the postCode or the city, but not the combination of it. Imagine you had a in_reference_table check where you code specify multiple columns like this:

(sourceCity, sourcePostCode) in_reference_table (refPostCode, refCity)


Currently without this function you need to create a view over the reference table that merges the 2 columns into a single column and you need to concatenate the source columns. This is significant effort to implement and it looks ugly.

Generally it would be nice if a variable in a data rule can be bound to an n-tuple instead of a single column / field. This would allow a much greater flexibility and reuse. E.g. imagine you a data rule definition:

A Exists


Currently this can only be bound to a single field like e.g. CreditCardNo. But it cannot be bound to CreditCardNo and CreditCardExpirationDate at the same time. To verify credit card information exists you would need to write instead:

A Exists and B Exists

If you could bind (CreditCardNo, CreditCardExpirationDate) to a single variable you dont need this, but you can stick to a simple A Exists data rule definition, increasing the re-use of data rule definitions significantly. The bound rule would look like this then:

(CreditCardNo, CreditCardExpirationDate) Exists

With it you also do not need an additional in_reference_table check, but you could stick to the in_reference_column check.