Question to the configuration and framework gurus: Is it possible to configure hierarchical LoVs using custom fields? We often see this use case in failure trees, where up to 5 fields are populated to categorize a problem (and potentially present suggested solutions).
For example, in Field1 you can choose 1, 2, 3. When you select 1, Field2 offers 1.1, 1.2, 1.3. When you select 1.3, Field3 offers 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, etc. You get the idea.
In Structured Failure Management we have a 3-level tree, so somehow it seems to be possible, but ideally I’m looking for a solution that works in Page Designer.
Appreciate your help.
Page 1 / 1
@Alexander Heinze I’m afraid what you’re asking for is not possible through config.
See the below post that goes in the same direction.
Hi,
The issue here is that you cannot add a filter when defining a custom attribute of the reference type. However, the client configuration concepts that have been introduced might be of interest.
The issue here is that you cannot add a filter when defining a custom attribute of the reference type. However, the client configuration concepts that have been introduced might be of interest.
That’s exactly what I’m playing with at the moment!
As I got the question from the side I just want to clarify. When I wrote
“you cannot add a filter when defining a custom attribute of the reference type”
What I meant is that when you define your custom attribute as a reference. You select the view that you want to reference and then what attributes to display to the user. Here, you can not specify that you want to filter the list of values. I’m not saying that a custom reference attribute can not be filtered in the client.
Conditional LOV filters can be applied to any reference (LOV) attribute, standard or custom, in the client.
With help from @tofuse I managed to achieve exactly what I was looking for. Solely using Page Designer!
@Marcel.Ausan , @Rukmal Fernando fyi.
I have extended this sample to 5 levels.
The attached Word document includes the ACP plus instructions. The sample was built on the Request entity in 24.2.0 and I also imported it successfully into 24.1.4.
Looks like I’m late for the party
Nice job @Alexander Heinze
I’m curious to know how you managed to solve it. As I last checked in 23R1 , conditional enumeration filters doesn’t accept dynamic values as filter conditions. has this been changed in 24R1?
However I managed to solve it using Datasource Aggregate Refs as described in this topic.
I’m curious to know how you managed to solve it. As I last checked in 23R1 , conditional enumeration filters doesn’t accept dynamic values as filter conditions. has this been changed in 24R1?
However I managed to solve it using Datasource Aggregate Refs as described in this topic.
This one uses a filter on a reference field, not an enumeration. Cannot remember though when this kind of filter was introduced.
@Alexander Heinze Thanks for sharing ACP. Very useful!
@Alexander Heinze you only uploaded the word doc, without the ACP.
I can see ACP inside word doc :)
If you wonder how LOV2 gets emptied when you select a new value in LOV1…
The entity that I pick from has a field NULL_VALUE.
When you pick into LOV1, LOV2..5 get updated with NULL.
@rkescoupland FYI.
thank you for that insight on clearing!
If you wonder how LOV2 gets emptied when you select a new value in LOV1…
The entity that I pick from has a field NULL_VALUE.
When you pick into LOV1, LOV2..5 get updated with NULL.
@rkescoupland FYI.
That’s really cool @Alexander Heinze thanks for sharing.
unfortunately - it did not work in my case - i assume because my lov are separate - but i can see it is a neat way to solve this issue in many scenarios. thanks for sharing
Hello @Alexander Heinze and @tofuse , Thank you for sharing this information.
In my scenario, I’m trying to create a filter for a custom reference field from the Functional Objects screen in IFS Cloud. But for some reason, I’m unable to view all the baseline attributes from the EquipmentFunctional entity in the ‘AdvancedView’ list. Due to this, I’m unable to access the baseline attribute which needs to be applied as the filter.
Based on your example, I can see the filter attribute is within the list used in AdvancedView.
Is this a product limitation or any thoughts around this issue would be appreciated.
