I'm trying to make a field read only when a given value is selected from a PickList.
I'm using a flag that is set to Y when the list has that value, and N otherwise.
I created a Business Component User Prop with the name Field Read Only Field: MyField set to the flag.
Thing is, this works with the vanilla component but it wont work on my custom component.
I can't figure out what is going on, the properties of the fields and flag are exactly the same. It should work...
Thanks for any help you can give me.
That user property is only supported on the business component class CSSBCBase and its subclasses. My guess is that you probably used CSSBusComp as the class of your business component. CSSBusComp is actually a superclass of CSSBCBase, and is very minimal and does not support Field Read Only Field. If that's the case, change it to CSSBCBase and you should be good to go.
Other option is that- if the record become read-only when the picklist value is being selected- that you'll need to make the picklist field Immediate Post Changes to be sure the user property is triggered.
Related
I want the ability to include a text field on any of the components my users use in crafter. Just like Intnernal Name is automatically added to every component. So whether I bring up component Type A or component Type B, it will automatically have this field without having to manually add it to every component.
I assume I have to modify some crafter code but not sure where?
Thank you.
If you need a cross-cutting field that's in all/most components, you should consider inheritance:
https://docs.craftercms.org/en/3.1/developers/content-inheritance.html
Quick question.
I have a custom two-option field on an entity, with "Yes"/"No" as the values; "Yes" has the underlying value 1, while "No" has the underlying value 0. I've set the default value for this field to "Yes". However, when I create new entity records, the field always gets the value "No" (0 in the database). It seems to be ignoring the default value I've set. Why?
The field is not present on any of the entity forms, as it's only used in underlying plugin code. Should that matter?
Are you creating a new record for this entity using code that uses the strongly-typed objects? If so, when you create a "new" entity in code, I'm guessing the class itself is setting that field to "false" by default. I don't think those generated classes respect the default values in the metadata. I also think that all fields are submitted on a create when you use these generated classes. That means that your class is setting it to "no" by default and then on create, the system thinks that you explicitly set it to "no" so default values are not applied. I think you need to explicitly remove that attribute from the attribute collection of your entity before you create it. That way the system should respect the default value on create. Sorry for all the "I thinks" but I'm not in a place that I can test or verify all of this. :)
I have a strange thing, I'm using dynamic field binding in a custom control.
The field binding is created like this.
XPage (Datasource "document" is placed here)
Custom Control (String passed in)
(to get errors if there are any)
Repeat (CompositeData is passed to a bean that returns the strings for Rows,columns)
Repeat (repeat 1 variable used for Columns)
Custom Control (fieldname is passed in)
field binding is done like this
#{document[compositeData.fieldName]}
The problem is that when I save the XPage I get an error in the messages control
Document has been saved by another user - Save created a new document as a response to that modified document.
And all fields are cleared.
Any ideas how to debug this or is there something I'm missing?
The "Document has been saved by another user" error is only tip of the iceberg - there are some really strange problems with reapeats that repeats fields that are bound and repeatControls property is set to false. The decoding part of xpages lifecycle cannot handle it properly - the controls will be losing data. You should use repeatControls set to true as Martin suggests.
"Repeat control variable doesn't exists" is probably caused by the property that removes repeats set to true. You can solve this by either changing it to false or by adding additional data context that will keep repeated value.
And finally for this to have add/remove functionality You can use Dynamic Content Control and show(null) hack to rebuild the repeat content.
To manage this complexity better I would advise You to stop using document data source and start creating some managed beans.
If You will follow my suggestions I guarantee that You will get the functionality You are looking for as I have few apps that works great and have this kind of complex data editors in them.
I don't know if it'll help you, but I pass both the document datasource and the field name as parameters to a DynamicField control, and use it like this:
compositeData.dataSource[compositeData.fieldName]
The type of the datasource is com.ibm.xsp.model.DataSource, it's listed as dataInterface under Data Sources.
Do you have repeatControls="true" set for the repeat control?
It sounds like you've got the datasource defined multiple times on the XPage (plus custom controls). Either that or the save button has save="true" but the code saves the document back-end, or code in multiple places saves the same document. I've used the same method of passing the datasource down to the custom control, but that may just be because that was what I saw on a blog.
Following on from this question: Referencing parent field on document creation I'm using the formula for the default value for a name field.
IfError(#IfError(#GetDocField($ref;"ProductFamilyManager");
#GetDocField(ParentUNID;"ProductFamilyManager"));
"")
This works when it's a computed field, but not when i change it to be editable with a default value formula.
Any ideas how I can get the field populating with the default value?
The best way of doing this is to use #InheritedDocumentUniqueId. You need to enable inheritance to make that function available, but you don't actually have to inherit any of the parent values.
You should definitely not have to be using two different techniques and #IfError to get this done. And btw: did you know that #IfError is obsolete as of Domino 7?
It may not be supported but just to be sure, has the parent doc been saved before you create the response doc?
Assuming that's not the problem, the alternative is to use the "inherit field values from parent doc " option, which will pass a value from the parent doc to the response doc on creation. I may have the wording wrong but the option is on the form properties dialog in Designer.
I am trying to create a Custom Field Type in SharePoint.
This control has it's value set based on another field in the same list.
Because of this requirement, this field should be displayed only in the Display Mode, and not in the Edit or Create mode.
How do I ensure this?
If I just code the ASCX control to not render a field, the field will show up like this in the Edit and Create mode.
alt text http://www.mannsoftware.com/blog/Lists/Photos/121308_0204_CrossSiteLo6.png
Generally you set the SPField.ReadOnlyField property to True to achieve the desired behaviour for any field. (Don't forget to SPField.Update accordingly!) There is an equivalent CAML attribute for list definitions, I believe.
That said, in your control class deriving from BaseFieldControl, you might just override the RenderFieldForInput() method and not call the base implementation to ensure nothing is rendered during Create or Edit. However, this would still render the field's table row in the form, which is probably not what you want. So to enforce the desired behaviour, use ReadOnlyField and override Update() in your SPField (not field control) class to always have it set to True.
It might be easier to just change this on a list-by-list basis by going to the Advanced section of the List Settings, setting Allow management of content types? to Yes, and then editing your content type to change the value of your field to 'hidden'.
Take a look at this blog post. I think it will give you some ideas. The concept uses different rendering templates based on the mode.
http://sharepoint.nailhead.net/2008/04/creating-rendering-template-that.html
Did you try and set the field as hidden?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/microsoft.sharepoint.spfield.hidden.aspx
Custom FORMS pages for new item and edit item (NewForm.aspx and EditForm.aspx) would be another way to achieve this.
Setting the ShowInEditForm and ShowInNewForm properties solved this for me.