I have 2 fields that looks for username, the gets the email address and phone number from user's person document.
Creator_Email: #NameLookup([NoUpdate]; #UserName; "OfficePhoneNumber")
Creator_Ext: #NameLookup([NoUpdate]; #UserName; "OfficePhoneNumber")
The problem is there is one user reported that the extension did not pull out. It came out blank
I have checked on the person document and the phone number is there
the email address pull out correctly, but when I tested changing the first letter of first and last name to lower case (ie. Test.User#domain.com to test.user#domain.com), the field that pulls the email address still show up with Upper case.
I have tried to take the user.id and test it on a different PC and the problem persists.
Any idea why this happens? I know there are 2 address books set up in the company and that is not ideal but I have checked the 2 address books and make sure all the needed information are there.
The #NameLookup formula does a look up to a hidden view on the database, and sometimes you run into a situation where the index for that view isn't up-to-date. You can go to the database and press CTRL+SHIFT+F9 to rebuild all the views, or you can try to use the FORCEUPDATE flag in your formula.
I think you'll find that the #NameLookup call is finding people who have created entries for themselves in their personal address books. If those entries are incomplete, the lookups will fail to find the missing fields.
The #NameLookup will use the parameter...
Go to /File/Preferences/Location then is the current location find the Server Tab and check that you defined Domino Directory server (if empty user search on local)
Check also in the Mail tab, Recipient Name lookup that could "stop after first march" or exhaustively search ALL the names known on the client.
In #NameLookup you can also use [NoUpdate]:[Exhaustive]
be aware as mention before that view may be not up to date, that caching can occurs in the #NameLookup.
In place of this, I suggest to use:
#DbLookup("":"";YourServer:"names.nsf" ; "($VIMPeople)" ; #Name([ABBREVIATE] ;#UserName) ; "OfficePhoneNumber");
Related
I have a problem with name lookups when creating a new email to a person where there are two people with the same name.
The first thing to mention is that we have our company contacts database listed as a local address book as well as the Domino Directory.
If there are two people with the same first name and surname in our contacts database, e.g. Phil Jones of company1 (phil.jones#fakecompany1.com) and Phil Jones of company2 (phil.jones#fakecompany2.com) the problem arises as follows.
Create a new mail and type "Jones" into the To field, and click on the Search directory for "Jones" drop-down option, only the second one is listed. When you select it, the first one is added to the To field. This can be checked by right-clicking on the name and selecting Show Name Details, of by pressing F9 to expand the name.
My educated guess is that over the years (and releases) since our contacts database was created, the mail and domino directory templates have changed, and that the ($Users) view that we use needs to be updated.
Can anyone confirm that it is the ($Users) view that is used by the EnterSendTo field in the Message|Memo form in the Mail85.ntf template? As far as I can tell it is a normal Names field with None selected in the choices option.
you could use the Script Debugger to see what's going on, and using Domino Designer to look into the Mail85.ntf template to find out what the code is doing, and which view is used.
You seem to have Recipient Name Lookup set up (not Type-ahead), with Stop after first match.
See Technote 1105261 - Differences between Recipient Name Lookup and Recipient Name Type-ahead for details.
See also Directory search order for a name in a Notes address field. and IBM Lotus Notes 8 Recent Contacts and Type-ahead features: FAQs if you decided to use Type-ahead and Recent Contacts.
What version of Notes/Domino with what version of the templates are you running?
Make sure you are running a supported configuration: Supported configurations for Notes/Domino 8.0.x and 8.5.x
I have a duplicate detection rule to check for contacts with the same last name and the same first two letters of the first name, case insensitive. I have checked the box to exclude inactive matching records and I have done no direct database manipulation.
To test the duplicate detection, I created a contact with my name and saved it. I then created a lead with the same last name and Mike instead of Michael for the first name. When I try to qualify that lead and create a contact from it I get a dialog titled Duplicates Detected, but in the bottom where the found duplicates should be it says "Potential duplicate records: None".
This article ( http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2693711 ) is the only thing I've found that seems to address the issue, but it doesn't solve my problem.
Edited to add: I discovered that if I trigger the duplicate detection rule by directly creating a new Contact as opposed to qualifying a Lead, it works correctly and it shows the matched possible duplicates. I'd still like to get it working when qualifying a Lead, however.
Sounds buggy to me, it really should show the user which record(s) are clashing.
However, I would come at the problem a different way - create a duplicate detection rule on Leads that look for matches against last name and first name on Contacts, so this would warn the user much earlier that there might be a conflict. E-mail address would always be a good indicator too, although it depends on your processes as to whether you would have captured that information at this early stage.
(likewise if you do B2B you may want to dupe check Leads against Accounts by company name)
Why waste all that time filling out details on a Lead only to find that it was already in the system as a qualified contact or account when you try to qualify it?
I work in a development/support team which has a shared Lotus Notes mailbox. We need to be able to associate an issue ID with each email. We started by adding this ID to the subject line (eg. "Something doesn't work [ID12345]"). For performance reasons, our IT dept don't allow indexing of shared mailboxes, so it takes a long time to search for a particular ID.
I decided to add a new ID field, which can be shown as a sortable column in views and folders. I put this field to the visible header (just below 'Subject') in the ($All) view and the ($Inbox) folder, and copied the ($Inbox) design to all the other folders in the database. That much was easy.
My problem is that when we reply or forward, this custom field is not carried over to the new memo, so we have to manually add it again before sending. And of course when the user responds, the field is again missing and must be manually added. I have searched the docs and the internet and haven't found any information on this. Either I have to declare this field as something which persists across replies and forwards, or I have to add a line somewhere which explicitly copies the field contents to the new memo.
fsw,
We do exactly this with our complaint system however our database is indexed although this should not be an issue to you. We created a view that is sorted by ID by extracting just the ID from the subject line, order it by ID and then by date descending. Base it on the $ALL folder view so you get both incoming and sent emails.
We then altered the memo form to include an embedded view single category of the new view that sits above the body which shows all other documents linked to the ticket.
This should avoid having to delve to far into the very complex mail template any further. One thing is to make sure you have a copy of the changes you made and a bit of doco re deploying as you can guarantee that one day your template will be completely overwritten in an upgrade and all your good work will be gone.
As the additional field would have to incorporated into all Memo forms in mail templates in your corporation and as these fields do not easily travel via SMTP, you should stick with the ID in the subject.
What you could do is to parse the subject (#Mid, #Right, ...) in the column formula in the view and only display the ID there (like you did with the additional field).
The other option I envision if having a field is required is to have an agent that processes the incoming message(reply) to have it parse out the issue ID from the subject and write it to the field. You could also do that with queryopen or postopen if running an agent is not possible
I'm storing information about local "events". They are described by 3 things - address, date, keywords(tags). I want to have only one search box for at least address and keywords. The date might go to a separate field. I'm assuming that most people will search for events that are taking place "today" so this filter won't get that much traffic.
I need those addresses to be correct (because I'm geocoding them afterwards) so I need to validate them before submitting the form and display a list of "did you mean" if a user made a typo there. I can't do life search here. I can do a live search on keywords. Keep in mind that a user can make a typo there too and I want to catch that.
Is there a clever way to design the input's parser in this case to guess which is supposed to be address and which keywords?
OR
Is there a way to actually parse it as user is entering his query? Maybe I should show autocomplete hints for keywords, after 3 first characters are entered, and if user denies to use them then to assume that it's a part of an address he's typing.
What do You think?
Take a look at Document Cloud's Visual search
http://documentcloud.github.com/visualsearch/#demo
We need to fetch the items added/updated after the user's last visit.
We need this information from 3 separate lists under the same web.
Pointers on how to accomplish this would be very helpful (and does SharePoint provide any API for this).
Kind regards,
Filtering by modified date is straightforward enough, though the method will depend on the type of view - the tricky part is getting the last login time - you're probably going to need a bit of custom code to save that.
Brute force would be to run a foreach on every version until you reach a version before the users last login date, and do this on every list item, and then again on every list. You can see which fields changed this way by seeing what changed between versions. You can narrow down the the set of items to do this on by only querying for ones with a modified date since the users last login
As for finding the users last login, sorry I can suggest anything for that. I've not looked for it before.