I am using a Multiple Document Selector field on one of my document types, so the user can select many documents they like.
Now I would like to loop through each of those documents and apply some HTML tags, my current solution applies the same rule to all of those documents, what I need to be able to do is find the second document that has been selected on the multiple document selector and apply a different rule!
Does anyone know how I can find the second element or any single element from the multiple document selector control.
Hope someone can help me.
Thank you
The Multiple Document Selector is not a standard Kentico control so I don't know how the value is stored but I guess it's something like comma-separated list of NodeAliasPaths. E.g.:
/News/News-1, /Products/Phones, /Services
In that case you can use K# macro:
Documents["/Page"].MutipleDocumentField.Split(",")[0]
// Selects the first document in MultipleDocumentField on page with NodeAliasPath == "/Page"
or
CMSContext.CurrentDocument.MutipleDocumentField.Split(",")[1]
// Selects the second document in MultipleDocumentField on the current page
Macros can also use loops and have lots of built-in methods. See the documentation or the following example:
{% foreach (x in Documents["/Home"].SubmitText.Split(",")) {""+x+""} %}
In my case it generates the following HTML:
/Partners
/News
/Services
You can use macros in all web part fields. Try inserting the code e.g. to static text web part.
Related
I'm currently on a project in which I included partialviews in every single row of a datatable.
it used to not be in a datatable at all, but I thought it could be a good idea for the use of the search function.
but of course, the partialview contains many text spans, even an external js called summernote, which includes lots of hidden text spans itself, and the search results are including every text within the global div. no need to say this isn't as accurate as I thought it would be.
I've seen that the search plugin could let us filter, for example, every div that has some class, but what I'm looking for is a functionnality that lets us filter on text contained in divs that have some class. this way I could ignore every other unrelevant text, hidden or not.
is it even remotely possible ?
thanks
There is no plain magic thing which let you filter a div containing a text combined with the question for a class which has to be also included. but you may write such a thing byself or use data attributes. Here is something which might be useful. filter multiple data attributes
Can someone confirm the behaviour of the Smart search results webpart when using a Smart search filter on a particular field, documentation here, when the index, and the expected results, are compound of multiple page types?
In my scenario I have 2 page types, one is always a child of the other, my hypothetical scenario would be a Folder and File types as an example.
I've configured the index with Pages type and Standard analyzer to include all Folder and File types under the path /MyOS/% on the tree.
The search page, includes the Smart search results webpart and a Smart search filter, a checkbox for the File's field FileIsHidden.
What I'm trying to ascertain is the possibility for the results to include all folders that have a hidden field, as well as the files?
Client has a v8.2 license and now has a requirement similar to this scenario.
Thanks so much for any help in advance.
Firstly what i would do is download the latest version of LUKE, it's a lucene inspector that allows you to run queries, inspect the data, etc.
https://code.google.com/archive/p/luke/downloads
Your search indexes are in the App_Data/Modules/SmartSearch/[SearchName], now i am not sure if LUKE can query 2 indexes as the same time, however you can run hte same query against both and see if it's filtering out results one way or another.
If you are trying to query where a field must be a value, and the other page type does not have the field, it probably is filtered out. What you need to do is use the lucene syntax to say "(classname = 'cms.file' and fileonlyproperty = '' OR classname <> 'cms.file')" so to say.
You'll have to test, but say the class name is cms.file and cms.folder, and the property is FileIsHidden, i think the syntax would be:
+((FieldIsHidden:(true) and classname:('cms.file')) OR (NOT classname:('cms.file'))
But you'll have to test that.
I am using Marklogic's search:search() functions to handle searching within my application, and I have a use case where users need to be able to perform a text search that returns matches from an attribute on my document.
For example, using this document:
<document attr="foo attribute value">Some child content</document>
I want users to be able to perform a text search (not using constraints) for "foo", and to return my document based on the match within the attribute #attr. Is there some way to configure the query options to allow this?
Typing in attr:"foo" is not a workable solution, so using attribute range constraints won't help, and users still need to be able to search for other child content not in the attribute node. I'm thinking perhaps there is a way to add a cts:query OR'd into the search via the options, that allows this attribute to be searched?
Open to any and all other solutions.
Thanks!
Edit:
Some additional information, to help clarify:
I need to be able to find matches within the attribute, and elsewhere within the content. Using the example above, searches for "foo", "child content", or "foo child content" should all return my document as a result. This means that any query options that are AND'd with the search (like <additional-query>, which is intended to help constrain your search and not expand it) won't work. What I'm looking for is (likely) an additional query option that will be OR'd with the original search, so as to allow searching by child node content, attribute content, or a mix of the two.
In other words, I'd like MarkLogic to treat any attribute node content exactly the same as element text nodes, as far as searching is concerned.
Thanks!!
You could accomplish this search with a serialized element-attribute-word cts query in the additional-query options for the search API. The element attribute word query will use the universal index to match individual tokens within attributes.
In MarkLogic 9 You may be able to use the following to perform your search:
import module namespace search = "http://marklogic.com/appservices/search"
at "/MarkLogic/appservices/search/search.xqy";
search:search("",
<options xmlns="http://marklogic.com/appservices/search">
<additional-query>
<cts:element-attribute-word-query xmlns:cts="http://marklogic.com/cts">
<cts:element>document</cts:element>
<cts:attribute>attr</cts:attribute>
<cts:text>foo</cts:text>
</cts:element-attribute-word-query>
</additional-query>
</options>
)
MarkLogic has ways to parse query text and map a value to an attribute word or value query.
First, you can use cts:parse():
http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/search-dev/cts_query#id_71878
http://docs.marklogic.com/cts.parse
Second, you can use search:search() with constraints defined in an XML payload:
http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/search-dev/query-options#id_39116
http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/search-dev/appendixa#id_36346
I'd look into using the <default> option of <term>. For details see http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/search-dev/appendixa#id_31590
Alternatively, consider doing query expansion. The idea behind that is that a end user send a search string. You parse it using search:parse of cts:parse (as suggested by Erik), and instead of submitting that query as-is to MarkLogic, you process the cts:query tree, to look for terms you want to adjust, or expand. Typically used to automatically blend in synonyms, related terms, or translations, but could be used to copy individual terms, and automatically add queries on attributes for those.
HTH!
EDIT: Rephrased issue
I think there is either a bug or I am doing something wrong.
I add a field to the type Blogpost. This field is of type
Contentpicker. I call it Related Page.
Then I create to regular pages (ContentType Page).
I create 4 blogposts. Two blogposts get PageOne as selected value in the RelatedPage field. The other two posts get PageTwo as selected value in the RelatedPage.
Now I create a query with filter ContentType is BlogPost. And a filter with Blog Post.Related Page equals {21} (that is the Id of PageOne).
I would expect to get results BlogPostOne and BlogPostTwo. Instead I don't get results. Actually I wanted the pageid to be retrieved from the page the widget is placed on but couldn't get it to work, so I reduced back to a predefined value instead of dynamic for the filter. But like I said no results.
So is the query wrong and how should I do it then. Or is there a bug with filters for ContentPicker fields.
P.S. I will also submit an issue in Codeplex.
UPDATE
In Tokenizer all the values that contain { } are being seen as tokens and therefore are replaced. The problem is that the Ids of content items in a contentpicker field are stored with accolades. So when having {21} as the value for the filter, 21 gets tokenized and since there is no value for this token the value becomes empty. When skipping the tokenizer it works (while debugging). But one cannot skip the tokenizer, because it is very legitimate that there is a token present.
So I believe there is a bug with either the tokenizer, or the way the ids are stored in the contentitem field for contentpicker. I think it can be solved by changing the contentpicker to store numbers separated with comma's but without the accolades.
have you tried using the alias of the page instead of content id as the identifier? e.g. "/about-us", like you do in the layer rules.
My indexed documents have a field containing a pipe-delimited set of ids:
a845497737704e8ab439dd410e7f1328|
0a2d7192f75148cca89b6df58fcf2e54|
204fce58c936434598f7bd7eccf11771
(ignore line breaks)
This field represents a list of tags. The list may contain 0 to n tag Ids.
When users of my site view a particular document, I want to display a list of related documents.
This list of related document must be determined by tags:
Only documents with at least one matching tag should appear in the "related documents" list.
Document with the most matching tags should appear at the top of the "related documents" list.
I was thinking of using a WildcardQuery for this but queries starting with '*' are not allowed.
Any suggestions?
Setting aside for a minute the possible uses of Lucene for this task (which I am not overly familiar with) - consider checking out the LinkDatabase.
Sitecore will, behind the scenes, track all your references to and from items. And since your multiple tags are indeed (I assume) selected from a meta hierarchy of tags represented as Sitecore Items somewhere - the LinkDatabase would be able to tell you all items referencing it.
In some sort of pseudo code mockup, this would then become
for each ID in tags
get all documents referencing this tag
for each document found
if master-list contains document; increase usage-count
else; add document to master list
sort master-list by usage-count descending
Forgive me that I am not more precise, but am unavailable to mock up a fully working example right at this stage.
You can find an article about the LinkDatabase here http://larsnielsen.blogspirit.com/tag/XSLT. Be aware that if you're tagging documents using a TreeListEx field, there is a known flaw in earlier versions of Sitecore. Documented here: http://www.cassidy.dk/blog/sitecore/2008/12/treelistex-not-registering-links-in.html
Your pipe-delimited set of ids should really have been separated into individual fields when the documents were indexed. This way, you could simply do a query for the desired tag, sorting by relevance descending.
You can have the same field multiple times in a document. In this case, you would add multiple "tag" fields at index time by splitting on |. Then, when you search, you just have to search on the "tag" field.
Try this query on the tag field.
+(tag1 OR tag2 OR ... tagN)
where tag1, .. tagN are the tags of a document.
This query will return documents with at least one tag match. The scoring automatically will take care to bring up the documents with highest number of matches as the final score is sum of individual scores.
Also, you need to realizes that if you want to find documents similar to tags of Doc1, you will find Doc1 coming at the top of the search results. So, handle this case accordingly.