Mike, Have you looked at using Dynamic groups and fields for row level access. Instead of trying to cram all of the groups into field 112 you could add a few Dynamic fields to split up the list of groups that can access the record. There could be some SQL performance considerations in using multiple Dynamic fields so you would have to make sure that it wouldn't over burden your environment.
Regarding being able to use a computed group in the Assignee Group field. I am pretty sure there isn't any issue with it and I pretty positive that I have used a computed group in field 112 before (it has been a little while since I have tried). Jason -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Balogh Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 10:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Assignee Group field length limit Jason, Thanks for the idea. I did look at the possibility of using computed groups. The problem is that one group of folks would need row-level access to a subset of records in the form, and a completely different group of folks would need row-level access to a different subset of records in the form. There is no overlap... one group cannot be allowed to see another group's records at all. As far as I'm aware, the only way to accomplish a security design like the one above is to use the Assignee Group field. And the Assignee Group field only accepts explicit groups. At least, that's what the documentation says. If anyone has experience otherwise, I'd be happy to hear about it. Thanks, ~Mike --- Michael J Balogh Wingspan Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________________________________________ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
