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; } } }

Template/custom fixed area layout error

prof_brazen_guff

Hi there

TS 6.72, LS 3.1. We have recently started using custom fixed area layouts and have been seeing a strange error. I've raised a support case, but am not getting much joy.

When editing templates, users are intermittently seeing the attached error. Some days they can edit them without any probs, then the next day the error returns. Also, the branch referenced in the error is different for different users. Has anyone seen anything similar? If so, how did you resolve it?

Thanks in advance

Paul

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Crsb

From the error " : Failed to get fixed layout configuration file:" the first thing to check is if the layout config file is in the proper location in the workarea where the user is having the issue.

prof_brazen_guff

Hi

Yes, the file is definitely in the correct location - most of the time we are able to edit our templates without any probs. Sometimes, for some reason, TS seems to be looking for these in a different branch where they don't exist.

Any thoughts?

Thanks for your help

Paul

Rick Poulin

Yep, I came across this a while back. What happens is that when you assign a template to a "preview site", that setting seems to be stored in the user's session and is not persistent across server resets and certainly not across users. I had a support case against that last summer with TS7.1 (since the problem still existed there) and after a few weeks, iwov engineering couldn't come up with any workarounds. I never did check if TS7.2 has that fixed.

To be fair, we did eventually come up with our own workaround.. Since our server tended to default to the 'component-guide' as the preview site, we just always kept a semi-updated copy of our fixed-layouts in that branch. It would work long enough for authors to switch back to the right one.

prof_brazen_guff

Thanks for the response Rick - I'd reached the stage where I realised I was wasting my time with support, so your suggested workaround is an ideal solution.

Paul