Displaying Category/Attributes in Detail View

Chris_Bowman_(spawaruser1_-_(deleted))

Some background...We are currently using an added system atribute to label objects with either General Use(1), Proprietary(2) or Program Sensitive(3). The idea behind this attribute was to give management users an idea of how permissions should be set on a specific item. When the decision was made to use the system attribute I was relatively new to the project and was tasked to find a way to make the select of a lebel required when adding a new object. One problem we ran into was setting the value for the existing object (new objects are required to have a value) . I now know that categories/attributes would be a better solution for a number of resaon; the most important (as I see it) is that Categories can be forced down within an folder to child objects.The question... (I do know this would require making modifications to weblingo files and the problems associated upgrades and patches)I would like to display the categor/attribute values when browsing using the DetailView. When a system attribute is added a new column is added to the DTree table and the attribute can be accessed by using the column. How would I access the category & attributes to add these values to the Detail View?Also, is there a way to wieght the values of attributes in a category. By this I mean, if the user sets the category/attribute value to Proprietary(2) on a container then all objects created in this container would have to have the same or higher classification?Thank you,Chris

Donna Nalls

Hi Chris,I agree with you that there are some drawbacks to using the system attributes over category/attributes; however, i also think there are some advantages to the system attributes, especially when it is only one value that you want to manage and make it displayable on the create/update pages directly. My great fear is that some day OT will decide they are no longer necessary and those of us that have used them will be up the proverbial creek. ;o(With regard to forcing the integrity of the custom attribute value, you should have a look at creating a node Callback. Orphan the NodeCallbacks object from LLIAPI into your custom module, then use the CBCreate and CBUpdate methods for your validation code. Yes, you are correct, it will require overriding some core LL code to pull the system data to be displayed on the browseview page. There are several approaches that you can take to accomplish this task. In addition to overridding the webnode/browseview.html weblingo file for display of the data, you will have to make some modifications to retrieve the extra data fields. The webnode _BrowseContents method retrieves the folder contents; however, it retrieves the data from the "WebNodes" view and not the DTree table directly. Consequently, your custom attribute field will not be included in the data array that is returned to browseview.html. You can certainly make the call from browseview.html to retrieve the additional data; however, that can be a very significant resource hit when the page is loading.Here are some initial thoughts (supported and not supported approaches):1) modify the webNodes database view to include your system attribute (will likely not be well received by Open Text if this comes to light in an OT support call)2) create a new view that is the same as webNodes and include your system attribute; modify _BrowseContents to query your new view instead of webNodes. You will find the definition of webNodes view in the DBWizApi ospace.3) modify _BrowseContents to do a second data retrieval of your system attribute after the ListContents() retrieves from the webNodes view.4) you can also create a new Browse command object that would supercede the Action-Browse command, from the new Browse command call a new/custom Browse Action object and make your code changes there. This will be a bit more work, but you would not have to override/patch _BrowseContents in the webnode object.I hope these thoughts are somewhat helpful. i have been accused of trying to give way too much detail - sorry if this is the case here...just wanted you to have several options to consider or draw from this info to find your own approach. Best,Donna