nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Online SubType registry

Robert_Davies_(unlondonadmin_-_(deleted))

Hi.Does anyone else think it would be a good idea if OpenText provided an online registry of subtypes? It occurs to me that if anyone has already used the SubTypes I am using then there might be trouble...Best regards/matt.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Mike_Oliver_(ollie_(Delete)_137504)

Amen! I have been suggesting this since day one of Livelink Builder. All it needs to be is a discussion with a topic of "SubType Registry" and when you generate and set a subtype you enter a reply with the subject: "SubType 270123 used by UnCola" and if you like describe the node type in the comments for the reply. Other topics in that same discussion would be Module names, Overrides, and possibly even request handlers, i.e. we would want to know if some new module had a 'custom.execute' request handler.

Robert_Davies_(unlondonadmin_-_(deleted))

Hi.Glad my suggestion resonated, but wouldn't a better solution be to use an Adobe form with fields for the creator info (author, company, email), module name, node name, subtype and description/purpose? You could then use a livereport to display the registry in an easy to browse format.Although a discussion is an easy way of doing exactly the same thing I think it's going to be harder to use in practice (particularly if it's successful), and hence less valuable.At the very least if we are going to use a discussion then might I suggest creating a totally new discussion for the registry so that it is obvious and doesn't risk getting cluttered or mixed in with the general discussions?Best regards/matt.

Mike_Oliver_(ollie_(Delete)_137504)

Possibly better in that it would be more structured but IMHO, as with any structured approach likely not to be used if it doesn't meet someone else's opinion of what should be there. As I said, I have been suggesting such a registry since day one of Livelink builder and as you can see it hasn't happened. So, I disagree, an unstructured discussion tree like this that only suggests a format will get more widespread use because it is easier to use and while yes reports might be easier with some forms package, I doubt if anybody will use them since they will likely just want to see if the item they want to create is already registered and a simple search will yield that.

Robert_Davies_(unlondonadmin_-_(deleted))

Ollie.You make a good point about discussions and as you are already populating it I will happily follow suit.But I do think the registry should be a separate discussion and not mixed in with the general SDK discussion.Best regards/matt.