Solved

IFS Cloud 22R2 - Editable Function in Page Designer

P
Rank
Badge +12

Hello,

in IFS Cloud 22R2, we have a property called ‘Editable Function’ in the Page Designer. I believe using this property, we can include conditions/parameters based on which the field will be marked either as Editable or Read-Only. 

But currently, it doesn’t allow us to add any conditions. Is there a specific scenario when we can use this property? Also, do we have any supporting documents or reference fields with this property enabled? Please let me know.

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

icon

Best answer by Alexander Heinze 6 March 2023, 16:05

View original

30 replies

T
Rank
Userlevel 4
Badge +8

Hi Jakub,

The short answer is, no, you cannot change the edit mode in client configurations.

The editable property that Alexander has displayed controls if a field is editable or not. I think what you are inquiring about is if it is possible to change the edit mode. In IFS Cloud, you will see "Single Cell Edit," "Single Row Edit," and "Multi Row Edit." For single cell and single row edit modes, the user can place the cursor into a field and start editing. For these modes, the save is also automatic when you leave the cell or row. Multi-row edit is where you have to manually start and end a save transaction.

The different save modes are used depending on what is suitable for the expected user behavior and, of course, how the data entity is structured. I can see that not all users would agree on how "suitable" the chosen save mode is for every context. However, one must keep in mind that these modes are, by technical reasons, not directly interchangeable. There is also more to it than just switching the mode on the element in the layout.

 

Kind regards

Tobias Furberg

 

 

J
Rank
Badge +1

Dear @Alexander Heinze,

Thank you for quick answer.

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

I don’t know what the “Editable Function” attribute does, however if you wanted to specify whether a field is editable or not you should use the “Editable” attribute.

Way more capabilities coming in that space in 23R1!

Dear @Alexander Heinze,

Do you by any chance have a solution to set fields in that way they are editable without clicking pencil icon?

E.g. customer label note in customer header

Looking forwards to reading from you.

Best Regards,

Jakub Wieczorek

I’m only aware of this one, see if that helps: Client Control Properties List - Technical Documentation For IFS Cloud

J
Rank
Badge +1

I don’t know what the “Editable Function” attribute does, however if you wanted to specify whether a field is editable or not you should use the “Editable” attribute.

Way more capabilities coming in that space in 23R1!

Dear @Alexander Heinze,

Do you by any chance have a solution to set fields in that way they are editable without clicking pencil icon?

E.g. customer label note in customer header

Looking forwards to reading from you.

Best Regards,

Jakub Wieczorek

T
Rank
Userlevel 4
Badge +8

Hi,

@Priyanka Cecilia V as I undestand it, the problem that you have with custom attributes is that you do not prefix them with a namespace, e.g., record, parent. See if your issue is solved by using the record namespace.

record.cf_Name != null

Conditional Fields:

https://docs.ifs.com/techdocs/23r1/040_tailoring/225_configuration/200_client_configurations/310_conditional_fields/ 

Condition Syntax:

https://docs.ifs.com/techdocs/23r1/040_tailoring/225_configuration/200_client_configurations/310_conditional_fields/300_condition_syntax/

Rukmal Fernando
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

@Priyanka Cecilia V the second scenario is a limitation that we’ve not been able to investigate deep into yet. Once we look into it, if we find a workaround, we will share that too on both the documentation and on this thread.

P
Rank
Badge +12

@Priyanka Cecilia V I think you’re referring to the scenario we discussed previously, of setting a field from JtTask to  be conditionally visible/editable/required based on a reference to JtExecutionInstance right?

We concluded the technical investigation on that literally today, and that specific scenario is unfortunately not something we can handle. The reason is that we came to realize that even though the projection has a reference from JtTask to JtExecutionInstance, in reality, a single JtTask instance will effectively be a wrapper for multiple JtExecutionInstance instances, so there is no logical reference from JtTask to JtExecutionInstance. The reference we tried to use is one that has been added to make some functional implementation easier.

The right way to approach references is to look at the Entity definition. Any associations defined between entities and also reflected as references on the Projection level can still be used.

I hope the above is clear and is some help, and we will be documenting this limitation and the right way to use references. Once we document this guidance properly, I will also share that with you.

Best regards,

Rukmal

@Rukmal Fernando,

Yes, I was referring to the above scenario and also another scenario which we discussed earlier. For the above scenario we tested, it worked for certain functionalities but was inconsistent. Sure, please share the document once it is available.

 

Second scenario: While we try to set a baseline field in JtTask to be conditionally visible/editable based on a Custom field in JtTask, it doesn’t reflect the changes. (i.e., unable to use custom fields as conditional parameters). Is this something that will be enhanced or already available in 23R2? Please let me know.

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Rukmal Fernando
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

@Priyanka Cecilia V I think you’re referring to the scenario we discussed previously, of setting a field from JtTask to  be conditionally visible/editable/required based on a reference to JtExecutionInstance right?

We concluded the technical investigation on that literally today, and that specific scenario is unfortunately not something we can handle. The reason is that we came to realize that even though the projection has a reference from JtTask to JtExecutionInstance, in reality, a single JtTask instance will effectively be a wrapper for multiple JtExecutionInstance instances, so there is no logical reference from JtTask to JtExecutionInstance. The reference we tried to use is one that has been added to make some functional implementation easier.

The right way to approach references is to look at the Entity definition. Any associations defined between entities and also reflected as references on the Projection level can still be used.

I hope the above is clear and is some help, and we will be documenting this limitation and the right way to use references. Once we document this guidance properly, I will also share that with you.

Best regards,

Rukmal

P
Rank
Badge +12

Hi @Rukmal Fernando,

Would it be possible to let us know when we can expect this feature to be released?

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Rukmal Fernando
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

@Priyanka Cecilia V in general, yes, just like the example we looked at together, we can use references to refer to related entities.

However, you might recall one instance where the referred entity had multiple records and we were evaluating against the incorrect one, and that’s turned out to be rather complex so we’re still working on that.

P
Rank
Badge +12

Thank you @Alexander Heinze 

Hi @Rukmal Fernando, does the conditions support if we refer to related entities other than the current entity in a specific screen in 23R2 MWO? Please advice.

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

@Priyanka Cecilia V  fyi. 

Rukmal Fernando
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

@Alexander Heinze yes, they are now supported on MWO with 23R2.

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

@Rukmal Fernando Looking at the new features for 23R2, the properties “editable”, “visible”, and “required” should be supported on MWO, correct?

Rukmal Fernando
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

One more thing to add, the old link is not valid anymore as the structure has changed a bit recently. Please check back in a day on https://docs.ifs.com/techdocs/23r1/040_tailoring/225_configuration/950_configuration_references/060_knownlimitations/#list_of_values

Rukmal Fernando
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

@Priyanka Cecilia V and @Alexander Heinze I work with James and I can jump in on this. There is actually limited support for setting Visibility, Editability and Requiredness on fields in Mobile, so we’ve updated the 23R1 technical documentation to reflect that (and thanks for spotting it!).

The link above might not reflect this right away, but should do so in a day or so to read: “IFS Cloud Mobile Apps have limited support for changing attribute properties such as Visibility, Editability & Required in Page Designer.”

Cheers,

Rukmal

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

I would let @James Ashmore answer that one.

P
Rank
Badge +12

Hi,

I saw this Known Limitation mentioned in 23R1 IFS Technical Documentation. I would like to confirm if this is related to this post for accessing Editable attribute in mWO Service.

https://docs.ifs.com/techdocs/23r1/040_tailoring/225_configuration/700_configuration_references/060_knownlimitations/#list_of_values

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

It’s a framework capability, so it should be available almost everywhere, but I’m not in a position to confirm it. I doubt anyone will, so you will probably have to wait until the first versions become available.

P
Rank
Badge +12

I don’t know what the “Editable Function” attribute does, however if you wanted to specify whether a field is editable or not you should use the “Editable” attribute.

Way more capabilities coming in that space in 23R1!

@Alexander Heinze, I would like kindly confirm if this feature is available for all Pages in 23R1 (both Cloud and mWO Service) or only for specific pages? Because we have requirements to add constraints to fields in various pages. 

Thanks.

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

I tried a condition with 1,000 characters and it was still evaluated successfully.

P
Rank
Badge +12

Thanks @Alexander Heinze. I will check with the above information.

 

Do we have any restrictions on the field length for the ‘Editable’ and ‘Visible’ attributes? In case, we have many conditions to check in these fields and if there is a restriction, I would like to be aware of it. 

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Alexander Heinze
Rank
Userlevel 6
Badge +18

Not sure if the 23R1 documentation is already accessible publicly, just try this: Conditional Fields - Technical Documentation For IFS Cloud

And this is from the Academy course “23R1 Experience Framework: New Features”:

 

P
Rank
Badge +12

Hi @Alexander Heinze, two follow up questions.

  • Is it possible to add conditions to a button/command group in the Editable attribute related to other Entities? 
    • For example: to hide the “Show Breaks” button in My Work screen in mobile when the Shift Status is “Off Shift”?
  • Do we have any document outlining the valid syntaxes to be used in the Editable attribute?

Please let me know.

 

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

P
Rank
Badge +12

Thanks @Alexander Heinze for your inputs on the “Editable” attribute available in 23R1.

Sure, I will raise another post for Hiding the screens. Appreciate the input on hiding the fields but we have other scenarios were we need to hide the entire screen. Therefore, would like to understand if we have any options.

Kind Regards

Priyanka Cecilia

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings