I'll try to improve xml widget integration adding a field like :
<field name="field1" group-find-condition="unionKey"><text-find/></field>
WDYT ?
On 02/02/2018 14:16, gil portenseigne wrote:
In a widget form to "OR" a condition between x fields you have to :
<field name="field1"><text-find/></field>
<field name="field1_grp"><hidden value="unionKey"/></field>
<field name="field2"><text-find/></field>
<field name="field2_grp"><hidden value="unionKey"/></field>
<field name="field3"><text-find/></field>
<field name="field3_grp"><hidden value="unionKey"/></field>
<field name="field4"><text-find/></field>
<field name="field4_grp"><hidden value="unionKey2"/></field>
<field name="field5"><text-find/></field>
<field name="field5_grp"><hidden value="unionKey2"/></field
<field name="field6"><text-find/></field>
<field name="field7"><text-find/></field>
You'll get
EntityCondition.makeCondition(
UtilMisc.toList(field1Condition, field2Condition,
field3Condition), EntityOperator.OR)
EntityCondition.makeCondition(
UtilMisc.toList(field4Condition, field5Condition), EntityOperator.OR)
These will be "AND" with the others... (6 and 7)
Indeed that's a bit ugly... but that do the job, and like I said, it's
a pretty rare need.
On 02/02/2018 12:14, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
Oh okay I understand. Well .. in that case how do you "OR" conditions in
the form? Do you do it selectively or do you want all "OR" or all "AND"?
On Feb 2, 2018 1:26 PM, "gil portenseigne" <gil.portensei...@nereide.fr>
wrote:
Inline
On 02/02/2018 11:04, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
So it's not some SQL union but rather just a simple "OR" instead of
"AND"
for some conditions.
Yes it's that simple, but between different fields.
I was actually thinking of this problem recently but not only for two
options but rather multiple options.
Nice, so we are not alone meeting this issue. This improvement allow
the
"OR" to be used between multiple (2 and more) fields conditions (even
multi-select widget). I took 2 for the example, but you can defined
many
different groups, that can contains many fields.
To be more specific, our drop-down form widgets have an attribute
"allow-multiple" or something like that which yields a list of values.
This
cannot be currently handled by performFind and the other related
search
services.
I confirm that performFind works with multi-select fields, if *no
specific
operator* is set :
if(UtilValidate.isNotEmpty(UtilGenerics.toList(fieldValue))){
fieldOp = EntityOperator.IN;
} else {
fieldOp = EntityOperator.EQUALS;
}
The condition will be EntityCondition.makeCondition(myField,
EntityOperator.IN, selectedValues)
So I think having an automatic "OR" on multiple dropdown values
is an important feature to implement and I would give that a +1.
The improvement concern OR condition between differents fields :)
Thanks !
Gil
On Feb 2, 2018 11:44 AM, "gil portenseigne"
<gil.portensei...@nereide.fr>
wrote:
Yes, actually using form widget with performFind services do not
offer a
way to union two search criteria.
Exemple : i want to find all communicationEvent that are in Bounced
status
*or* that contains something in note field. (very specific,
strange, thats
why)
By default all search criteria are managed in EntityCondition like :
List<EntityCondition> allDefaultSearchCriteria =
UtilMisc.toList(criteria1Condition, criteria2Condition ...);
The resulting final condition would result as :
EntityCondition.makeCondition(allDefaultSearchCriteria,
EntityOperator.AND)
With the enhancement, by regrouping two fields with field1_grp =
'groupKey'
and field2_grp = 'groupKey'
the following condition is added to the other default ones like :
allDefaultSearchCriteria.add(EntityCondition.makeCondition(U
tilMisc.toList(field1Condition, field2Condition), EntityOperator.OR));
I hope this will be clearer.
On 01/02/2018 21:07, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
Hi, perhaps if you share the idea of how to translate it to the entity
engine conditions then we'd be better informed?
On Feb 1, 2018 6:30 PM, "gil portenseigne"
<gil.portensei...@nereide.fr>
wrote:
Hello,
In a customer project we met a very specific need in a search screen
that
offer search criteria that must unions and not intersect.
I propose this improvement in OFBIZ-10195, https://s.apache.org/sjW1
but
i'm wondering if any of you ever met such need ?
Is that worth to be commited in the code base ? I tend to say
yes, but
i'd
like to hear the community out about this.
Thanks !
Gil
