Doug, we discovered some other issues with in this area too.
1. When an attachment field is not in the view PERFORM-ACTION-OPEN-ATTACHMENT fieldId stops working 2. When you place all kind of fields on a tab and the use has no access to the page holder, the Active Link workflow can access fields of all type but the attachment field. Do you think the engineering time would mind fixing those things? I’m very hesitant lately reporting any bugs then most of the time they would like to fix things. Thomas > On 27 Jan 2017, at 08:57, Mueller, Doug <[email protected]> wrote: > > ** > Thomas, > > I would consider this a bug. > > The system should be gracefully degrading by noting that the fieldID is not > in the view and so take no action quietly. > > If you are getting an error or failure of the screen, this is not what I > would expect. > > Doug > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Thomas > Miskiewicz > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 3:01 AM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: ARS 9.1: Question about hiding fields > > ** > Hi Doug, > > you said: > "As has been noted this is NOT security, the *field is still fully accessible > to the user* it is just not possible to show it on the screen from the > mid-tier." > > We got a form with views. We moved all hidden fields to the other view in > order to hide the temp fields from the Advanced Search field selection for > the user. > > This however broke some workflow which was doing a Set Focus on fields that > are not in the other view. I know, doind a set Focus on the hidden field is > WIRED, but fully accessible is fully accessible. > > Is this a bug or what kind of full accessibility did you have in mind saying > that even fields that are in neither view are fully accessible to the user? > > > Thomas > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Mueller, Doug <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > ** > Dustin, > > A field that is “not in view” has multiple advantages: > > 1) It is not in Field list dropdowns as noted so it is “more hidden” > than other fields > > 2) It has no view properties so it in fact is more efficient. There is > no screen widgetry defined, there is less html in the page (think about it, > if it is just hidden, it COULD be made visible so you have to define the > widget, have html that describes it and positions it and cares for it and …. > While if not in view it is NEVER possible to show it so there is no view > definition at all. It is lighter and if you have many of them, it does have > a notable impact on the volume of html in the screen so it is more efficient) > > > As has been noted this is NOT security, the field is still fully accessible > to the user it is just not possible to show it on the screen from the > mid-tier. You can reference it through workflow and work with it > programmatically like any other field. If you don’t want the user to have > access, control with PERMISSIONS not with hiding or making not in view. > > As a general suggestion, if a field is NEVER visible on the screen, I > strongly suggest you have it not in view. It reduces overhead and makes the > system more efficient. Only have things in view that have the possibility of > being displayed under some condition. > > Doug Mueller > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of > Brittain, Mark > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:23 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: ARS 9.1: Question about hiding fields > > ** > Dustin, > > A field that is not in the view does not appear in the Field menu for an > Advanced Search. So this might be a good way to limit what users are > searching on. Of course if you have a savy user they can always type the > field name with quotes (e.g. ‘Wigit Name’) but I haven’t found anyone who > does that. > > Mark > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of LJ > LongWing > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 3:02 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: ARS 9.1: Question about hiding fields > > ** > Dustin, > The main advantage is the fact that the field isn't taking up any screen real > estate anywhere on the form. The object still exists on the form, is still > transferred to the client, so it's not a transport advantage, but the fact > that the field's not cluttering up the display is a maintenance advantage :) > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Fawver, Dustin <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > ** > Greetings! > > > > During my analysis of workflow for the migration to ARS 9.1, I have found > that fields can be hidden in several ways. > > > > - Hidden explicitly by the field's properties > > - Placed in a panel page that the user doesn't not have permissions to. > > - Removed from the user's view > > - The field not being placed in any view > > > > I found some fields being referenced in workflow that existed on the form but > that weren't in any views. Are there any advantages or disadvantages to > having a field that's not present in any view versus a field that is simply > hidden? > > > > Thanks for your input. > > > > --Dustin Fawver > > > > HelpDesk Technician > > Information Technology Services > > East Tennessee State University > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
