UX: How do you create an editable query by using the UX framework?


What is a way to create an analogue of an editable report using UX framework?

You can accomplish this by doing the following:

  • 1. Create the query data source.
  • 2. In the code, create an iterator over the data (dom-repeat or iron-list).
  • 3. Either add a button for saving, or catch the on-change event in order to commit the data to the database by using the triplat-ds updateRecord method.

In newer platforms, you can look into triblock-table as well. I’ve never used it, but you can definitely create custom components inside the cells in order to make displaying data easier.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the UX Framework tag or Perceptive tag.]

Continue reading

Why doesn’t the navigation item load the form or external link?


When the navigation item is saved with special characters, the user is unable to open the form. Upon clicking the item, an error is reported: “Due to either a session timeout or unauthorized access, you do not have permission to access this page.”

When you create a custom navigational link, if special characters are used such as /, \, &, #, %, they break the capability to redirect the user to a form or to an external link. Refrain from adding a special character. They must be omitted so that the form can be rendered.

[Admin: This post is related to the 01.29.18 post about restricting special characters in a text field. To see other related posts, use the Character tag.]

Continue reading

Why aren’t Group record changes copied through object migration?


Why aren’t Group record changes copied through object migration?

The short answer is that IBM TRIRIGA sees this as an unsupported customization of the Group record. Let’s clarify this further. Even though technically, behind the scenes, Groups are record data, they are currently considered TRIRIGA platform-owned and so, controlled BOs (business objects).

The platform controls exactly what Group data the object migration (OM) can export/import. Thus, any fields added to the Group BO will not be recognized by OM when exporting/importing Group records. Modifications to any platform-owned and controlled BOs are not supported. This does not just apply to Group BOs only.

If the BO is a platform-controlled object and any changes are not supported, then why does the platform currently allow changes to it?

IBM TRIRIGA currently does not prevent users from modifying any BOs, even the ones that are specifically necessary for core platform functionality. The Group BO, Document BO, and triPlatformObjectLabelManager BO are just a few examples. Although the platform does nothing to prevent users from modifying these BOs, TRIRIGA does not support the modification of any of these.

For these core platform BOs, the object migration tool is designed to pull exactly what it needs for the designed platform functionality when exporting/importing the record data tied to these BOs. In other words, any modifications will compromise the TRIRIGA platform integrity, so it becomes an unsupported action if done so.

The wiki on Core objects in TRIRIGA Application Platform functionality details the core platform business objects that should not be modified. Meanwhile, for the expressed requirement to see Group modifications exported/imported with Group record data, a request for enhancement (RFE) was submitted and will be considered for a potential platform change in a future TRIRIGA release.

[Admin: This post is related to the 11.07.17 post about core objects you shouldn’t modify. To see other related posts, use the Groups tag or Object Migration tag.]

Continue reading

How do you set the number of form actions in a security group?


We recently upgraded to TRIRIGA Platform 3.5.3 and we are still in Application 10.3. We have a custom cstWorkTask form and it has 133 form actions. In the “Shop Foreman” security group, we want to give access to over 125 form actions.

But it looks like there is a limit where you can only set 119 form actions. Because as soon as you select the 120th form action, the spinning wheel appears and never completes. We have tried clicking the “Select All” check box, but as soon as you click that, the spinning wheel appears and never completes. If we remove a couple of actions from the 119 already selected, then it lets you check two more without the spinning wheel. Is there any setting that controls how many form actions can be set in the security group? Or is this a known issue?

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Security Manager tag.]

Continue reading

Can you run all patch helpers (10.3 to 10.5.2) after final OM import?


We have upgraded the TRIRIGA platform to 3.5.2.3 and started upgrading the application from 10.2 to 10.5.2 in incremental order (10.3, 10.3.1, until 10.5.2). To minimize the outage and complexity during production implementation, we have been suggested to take a final OM package after completing 10.5.2 deployment, and apply all the customizations which might have been impacted with the upgrade. This final OM package will contain all the changes from 10.2 to 10.5.2.

Our question is on the patch helpers: Can we run all the patch helpers (from 10.3 to 10.5.2 in order) after importing the final OM package?

Also, we are running the Varchar-to-Numeric script before importing the application upgrade packages. This script is taking a long time (almost a day in two test environments), but when we tried in another environment, it’s running for more than 2 days and still didn’t get executed. Is it normal for this script to run like that? Or will it be an issue? There are no differences between the environments.

I wouldn’t recommend doing the upgrade in one package. Usually, it ends up being quite large and it will cause issues. The IBM-recommended way is to perform each OM, then run the patch helpers. Once you have upgraded the OOB OM packages, you can have one OM which has your custom objects…

[Admin: This post is related to the 10.25.17 post and 04.28.17 post about running “SetVarcharColsToNumeric” scripts. To see other related posts, use the Scripts tag.]

Continue reading

How do you rename forms without breaking CAD Integrator mapping?


I’ve made some modifications to a handful of forms that are connected to CAD BO Mapping records (e.g. triEmployee, triSpace, triFloor, etc.). I’ve updated the label to follow the traditional TRIRIGA customization standards and relabeled them with “cst” such as “cst-triSpace”. However, in AutoCAD, when I attempt to Smart Attach and/or Publish drawings, I get an error that seems to point towards the GUI Name of the form not lining up to the CAD Mapping. How do I get CAD Integrator to pick up the same form but with a different label?

When renaming those forms, you must make a few changes to the CAD backend:

  • 1. Create new CAD Mapping records that point to the new form. I recommend checking the old mapping records to make sure all fields are added properly.
  • 2. If you added any required fields, I believe that they need to be added to the CAD Mapping record.
  • 3. Open the CAD Hierarchy and make sure each node is pointing to the new Mapping record that you created from Step 1.
  • 4. Update the form on the CAD Label Style to point to the new form.

Note: If you are on a newer platform, I recommend keeping the form names as “tri”, and using object labels to manage versioning.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Integrator tag or Object Label tag.]

Continue reading