Ok, thanks for the examples.It looks good that you can avoid seeing the documents in the folder tree structure. Your first answer when I asked if we could collapse - I misunderstood.So ok 😊
We don’t want to see documents in the Folder tree.We have large folder structures and some nodes kan have over 100 documents connected.We want the folder tree structure to be clean and clear and not disturbed by documents that make it unclear.
Thanks for your answer.So if a folder has both child folders and documents connected you cannot only see the folders?We really don’t want to see the documents in the folder tree.We have big folder structures and it can be over 100 documents connected to a folder in the structure.
Can you please clarify this a bit more?Visualize documents within the folders directly within a document folder node. Visualize the document details in the Document Folder Navigator page. Drag and drop documents between document folder nodes in a structure.Ad 1Will you show a list of all documents inside the folder tree in new node? Will it be possible to collapse this node or have an option not to show this document node in the navigator?Ad 2Will you create a new tab to show document metadata for the selected document in the Document tab?Ad 3Will you make it possible to move the documents from one folder node to another folder node with drag and drop? What we really need is a possibility to collapse the Document/All Documents block to easily use the Attachment panel.Example: If you have few documents, it is not a big problem, but when you have over 100 documents connected, it makes it less viewable and can be confusing.
It works fine with only one original file in file reference, so why do we need 2?We do not experience any difference if the pdf has 2 or 1 pointer in File Ref. So could we get rid of one of them?If we have only one original file in File.Ref and then create a new revision, we get 2 lines in File Ref. as expected.But do we really need 2?
I did not get an answer to this: “Can we solve this simple by adding a custom field on the WorkTask holding the parent WorkOrder's Activity_Seq? In stead of creating a transformation method?”
Can we solve this simple by adding a custom field on the WorkTask holding the parent WorkOrder's Activity_Seq? In stead of creating a transformation method?
Good, I was afraid that the object connection had to really exist to be able to do the roll up.
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
