Uploaded image for project: 'KFS Request'
  1. KFS Request
  2. KFSMI-607

Allow maintenance documents to show / hide inactive list items with appropriate buttons

    Details

    • Type: Enhancement
    • Status: Rice Roadblock
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: TBD
    • Sub-Committee:
      SYS
    • Impacted Modules:
      System

      Description

      See attached email thread.

      This may or may not become a required release item for KULCAP 3.0. That depends how exactly Pre Asset Tagging will pan out with respect to how CAB will be implemented.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            pcberg Philip Berg added a comment -

            ________________________________________
            From: Byrne, Ailish M
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:39 PM
            To: Berg, Philip Clemens; 'Jonathan Keller'
            Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris
            Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            You're welcome to create a KFSMI jira for this now - please use the plan item All: Active Indicator Additions

            Yeah, I don't really care about who it's for - I care about a way to classify what gets thrown out if the purap module is overridden - we can call it whatever we want?

            From: Berg, Philip Clemens
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:36 PM
            To: Byrne, Ailish M; 'Jonathan Keller'
            Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris
            Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            Ok, Jonathan's approach sounds fine to me. And it answered my question on that this would be an enhancement Queing would have to wait on. I pasted Jonathan's email below so that I have it in one place.

            I asked (Theresa) about making it part of CAB and the answer of that was that CAB isn't for departmental users. Anyway, I agree - that warrants further consideration as part of the bigger picture in CAB.

            Unless we have objections I'd propose resolving Queing's task of Pre Asset Tagging and starting another JIRA accommodating the show / hide functionality. This will be related to the other outstanding task on Pre Asset Tagging (KULCAP-153 which deals with data dependencies). Both those JIRAs should be taken into consideration for CAB then.

            Thoughts? ?

            Philip

            ________________________________________
            From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:24 PM
            To: Byrne, Ailish M
            Cc: Berg, Philip Clemens; Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris
            Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            It's slightly different, and it would probably be an improvement. (Correct me if I'm mis-remembering though.) The show/hive inactive link on the main tab causes inactive records to be completely suppressed from the form. There's no header available to show single inactive entries. In this case, the inactive records would be present but collapsed. I think this would be an improvement over the current situation where the user must scan through all the records to see which ones are inactive. But, I agree, the functionals would need to OK it if we made the change globally.

            ________________________________________
            From: Byrne, Ailish M
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:27 PM
            To: Berg, Philip Clemens; 'Jonathan Keller'
            Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris
            Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            The current standard is what we have implemented in the maint and inquiry frameworks - not sure I'm recalling correctly but I think to show inactive on initial load? So, I think we need to revisit that with the group that specified the standard before putting in a hook to deviate from the standard. I actually thought it was weird at the time to default to showing them - and a practice they might change their mind on when dealing with actual production data. I just saw Jonathan's note, which clarified things a bit for me - and makes me think even more that this would be an improvement.

            Yeah, so I think pre-asset tagging is going to be part of what we designate as CAB - along with anything else that would basically have to be rewritten, if the purchasing module were switched out. But, we shall see as we discuss all this further?

            From: Berg, Philip Clemens
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:18 PM
            To: Byrne, Ailish M; 'Jonathan Keller'
            Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris
            Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            What is the current standard for show/hide active/inactive in kuali? Functionally the issue on the Maintenance Document is that in FIS they delete detail records but in kuali we inactivate. The functional issue with that is that it's too much information displaying at once if the inactive ones show too. (Ailish: I bounced this functional request off you a few weeks ago - maybe I translated that into the wrong technical solution for Queing)

            And yea, I'm still worried how Pre Asset Tagging will pan out once we tackle CAB & modularization. Pre Asset Tagging sits between PurAp and CAB. It's an optional step. What happens is that it pulls in line item data from PurAp and feeds it into CAB to pre-populated the fields that it's collecting. The MD Queing is working on is a chance for departmental users to intercept this data within CAMs to "fix" it before it hits CAB. Keep in mind CAB is only for Capital Asset office users. Why doesn't it sit in PurAp? Well apparently they can't fill out some fields (such as serial number) until the ordered equipment actually arrives at their office. Hence there is a CAMs interception point. Anyway, this blurb is jumping ahead of myself... but considering we haven't quiet started yet on CAB and are just starting on modularization this is worrying me. (Disclaimer: The blurb I wrote here is my one paragraph summary of the Pre Asset Tagging spec document - it's probably not a very good functional recap. I just wanted to expand on what my fear with Pre Asset Tagging is.)

            Philip

            ________________________________________
            From: Byrne, Ailish M
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 3:40 PM
            To: 'Jonathan Keller'; Berg, Philip Clemens
            Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris
            Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            If we decide to do this one, we'll need to run it by other functional folks before starting development, because it's in direct conflict with the decision made regarding show/hide active/inactive for the rest of the app.

            From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 2:46 PM
            To: Berg, Philip Clemens
            Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Mark Morris
            Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            Yes, it would be an enhancement request for Rice for either solution. So, if there are potential changes coming to that document which might make the requirement go away, let's postpone requesting this enhancement for now.
            On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Berg, Philip Clemens <pcberg@indiana.edu> wrote:
            It's a maintenance document. So I guess she doesn't have easy access to the Form. Yes, by default, hide (or collapse) inactive items in a detail list. For some reason I thought this was already supported somewhere.

            This is for the details list on Pre-Asset Tagging Maintenance Document. If it involves an enhancement request I wonder if we want to table this issue for a while. I'm a bit worried about how Pre-Asset Tagging will pan out given our modularization discussion. OTOH if it's not a big deal it would be nice for Queing to bring preliminary conclusion to Pre Asset Tagging until we revisit it for the purposes of modularization.

            Philip

            ________________________________________
            From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 12:28 PM

            To: Queing Lai
            Cc: James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Berg, Philip Clemens
            Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            Do you have access to the Struts Form object (something that extends KualiForm)? If so, you can access the tabStates Map. Each one of the tabs on the document has it's state put into that map. You can look at your existing document to get the nature of the key. (It's something like ObjectClassName+<displayed description with whitespace removed>.) If you can set the value associated to that key to CLOSED, then it will not open them by default.

            There's no implicit means currently in the framework to default inactive items to CLOSED. There are a couple ways we can approach this. 1) If we get agreement from the functionals that Inactive records in a collection should default to collapsed, then we can make that change globally. But we need general functional approval for that, since it will affect all existing documents as well.

            The other option is to add a couple flags to the DD to control this behavior. One to allow the defaulting of all items in a collection to collapsed, and another to provide the same functionality but for inactive Inactivatable objects only. However, the data dictionary change will have to wait until after we get the changes to it merged into release 3.

            Once we decide which path to take, I can put in a JIRA for the enhancement.
            On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Queing Lai <qlai@fismaster.usc.edu> wrote:
            Yes.

            ________________________________________
            From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:59 AM

            To: Queing Lai
            Cc: James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Berg, Philip Clemens
            Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            And so, I'm assuming, that the inactive records show up fully visible, and you have a requirement to make them collapsed by default? And, active records should be expanded by default?
            On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Queing Lai <qlai@fismaster.usc.edu> wrote:
            To show their single-line summaries display with their own show/hide button. So users can view it, if they want to.
            Thank you.

            Queing

            ________________________________________
            From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com
            Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:43 AM
            To: Queing Lai
            Cc: James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Berg, Philip Clemens
            Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows
            I'm not sure that I get it. You want the inactive records hidden when the tab is set to "Show Inactive?" And, by hidden, so you mean that the records simply do not show up at all, or that their single-line summaries display each with their own show/hide button?

            I'm trying to understand what behavior you are trying to accomplish that is different from the rest of the system.
            On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Queing Lai <qlai@fismaster.usc.edu> wrote:
            Jonathan and Ailish,

            Hi, I have a complex maintenance documents with a list of collection records. When this document is brought up, each inactive collection member of this document needs to be hidden with the 'show' button on. It is a 'show/hide' button for inactive records.

            Please let me know your advice and thank you.
            Bye the way, James, thank you for helping me.

            Queing

            ----Original Message----
            From: James Smith jksmith@arizona.edu
            Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:42 AM
            To: Queing Lai
            Cc: Jonathan Keller; Byrne, Ailish M
            Subject: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows

            Hi Queing. Could you send a description of the business requirement for the show/hide of records in the maintainableCollection to Jonathan and Ailish? They want to make sure they understand the issue so that they know if this behavior conforms with how show/hide works on other maintainable collections (and Jonathan and Ailish can both give more sage advice on the show/hide issue than I can). Thanks much!

            James

            Show
            pcberg Philip Berg added a comment - ________________________________________ From: Byrne, Ailish M Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:39 PM To: Berg, Philip Clemens; 'Jonathan Keller' Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows You're welcome to create a KFSMI jira for this now - please use the plan item All: Active Indicator Additions Yeah, I don't really care about who it's for - I care about a way to classify what gets thrown out if the purap module is overridden - we can call it whatever we want? From: Berg, Philip Clemens Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:36 PM To: Byrne, Ailish M; 'Jonathan Keller' Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows Ok, Jonathan's approach sounds fine to me. And it answered my question on that this would be an enhancement Queing would have to wait on. I pasted Jonathan's email below so that I have it in one place. I asked (Theresa) about making it part of CAB and the answer of that was that CAB isn't for departmental users. Anyway, I agree - that warrants further consideration as part of the bigger picture in CAB. Unless we have objections I'd propose resolving Queing's task of Pre Asset Tagging and starting another JIRA accommodating the show / hide functionality. This will be related to the other outstanding task on Pre Asset Tagging ( KULCAP-153 which deals with data dependencies). Both those JIRAs should be taken into consideration for CAB then. Thoughts? ? Philip ________________________________________ From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:24 PM To: Byrne, Ailish M Cc: Berg, Philip Clemens; Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows It's slightly different, and it would probably be an improvement. (Correct me if I'm mis-remembering though.) The show/hive inactive link on the main tab causes inactive records to be completely suppressed from the form. There's no header available to show single inactive entries. In this case, the inactive records would be present but collapsed. I think this would be an improvement over the current situation where the user must scan through all the records to see which ones are inactive. But, I agree, the functionals would need to OK it if we made the change globally. ________________________________________ From: Byrne, Ailish M Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:27 PM To: Berg, Philip Clemens; 'Jonathan Keller' Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows The current standard is what we have implemented in the maint and inquiry frameworks - not sure I'm recalling correctly but I think to show inactive on initial load? So, I think we need to revisit that with the group that specified the standard before putting in a hook to deviate from the standard. I actually thought it was weird at the time to default to showing them - and a practice they might change their mind on when dealing with actual production data. I just saw Jonathan's note, which clarified things a bit for me - and makes me think even more that this would be an improvement. Yeah, so I think pre-asset tagging is going to be part of what we designate as CAB - along with anything else that would basically have to be rewritten, if the purchasing module were switched out. But, we shall see as we discuss all this further? From: Berg, Philip Clemens Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:18 PM To: Byrne, Ailish M; 'Jonathan Keller' Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows What is the current standard for show/hide active/inactive in kuali? Functionally the issue on the Maintenance Document is that in FIS they delete detail records but in kuali we inactivate. The functional issue with that is that it's too much information displaying at once if the inactive ones show too. (Ailish: I bounced this functional request off you a few weeks ago - maybe I translated that into the wrong technical solution for Queing) And yea, I'm still worried how Pre Asset Tagging will pan out once we tackle CAB & modularization. Pre Asset Tagging sits between PurAp and CAB. It's an optional step. What happens is that it pulls in line item data from PurAp and feeds it into CAB to pre-populated the fields that it's collecting. The MD Queing is working on is a chance for departmental users to intercept this data within CAMs to "fix" it before it hits CAB. Keep in mind CAB is only for Capital Asset office users. Why doesn't it sit in PurAp? Well apparently they can't fill out some fields (such as serial number) until the ordered equipment actually arrives at their office. Hence there is a CAMs interception point. Anyway, this blurb is jumping ahead of myself... but considering we haven't quiet started yet on CAB and are just starting on modularization this is worrying me. (Disclaimer: The blurb I wrote here is my one paragraph summary of the Pre Asset Tagging spec document - it's probably not a very good functional recap. I just wanted to expand on what my fear with Pre Asset Tagging is.) Philip ________________________________________ From: Byrne, Ailish M Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 3:40 PM To: 'Jonathan Keller'; Berg, Philip Clemens Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Mark Morris Subject: RE: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows If we decide to do this one, we'll need to run it by other functional folks before starting development, because it's in direct conflict with the decision made regarding show/hide active/inactive for the rest of the app. From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 2:46 PM To: Berg, Philip Clemens Cc: Queing Lai; James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Mark Morris Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows Yes, it would be an enhancement request for Rice for either solution. So, if there are potential changes coming to that document which might make the requirement go away, let's postpone requesting this enhancement for now. On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Berg, Philip Clemens <pcberg@indiana.edu> wrote: It's a maintenance document. So I guess she doesn't have easy access to the Form. Yes, by default, hide (or collapse) inactive items in a detail list. For some reason I thought this was already supported somewhere. This is for the details list on Pre-Asset Tagging Maintenance Document. If it involves an enhancement request I wonder if we want to table this issue for a while. I'm a bit worried about how Pre-Asset Tagging will pan out given our modularization discussion. OTOH if it's not a big deal it would be nice for Queing to bring preliminary conclusion to Pre Asset Tagging until we revisit it for the purposes of modularization. Philip ________________________________________ From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 12:28 PM To: Queing Lai Cc: James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Berg, Philip Clemens Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows Do you have access to the Struts Form object (something that extends KualiForm)? If so, you can access the tabStates Map. Each one of the tabs on the document has it's state put into that map. You can look at your existing document to get the nature of the key. (It's something like ObjectClassName+<displayed description with whitespace removed>.) If you can set the value associated to that key to CLOSED, then it will not open them by default. There's no implicit means currently in the framework to default inactive items to CLOSED. There are a couple ways we can approach this. 1) If we get agreement from the functionals that Inactive records in a collection should default to collapsed, then we can make that change globally. But we need general functional approval for that, since it will affect all existing documents as well. The other option is to add a couple flags to the DD to control this behavior. One to allow the defaulting of all items in a collection to collapsed, and another to provide the same functionality but for inactive Inactivatable objects only. However, the data dictionary change will have to wait until after we get the changes to it merged into release 3. Once we decide which path to take, I can put in a JIRA for the enhancement. On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Queing Lai <qlai@fismaster.usc.edu> wrote: Yes. ________________________________________ From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:59 AM To: Queing Lai Cc: James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Berg, Philip Clemens Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows And so, I'm assuming, that the inactive records show up fully visible, and you have a requirement to make them collapsed by default? And, active records should be expanded by default? On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Queing Lai <qlai@fismaster.usc.edu> wrote: To show their single-line summaries display with their own show/hide button. So users can view it, if they want to. Thank you. Queing ________________________________________ From: Jonathan Keller keller.jonathan@gmail.com Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:43 AM To: Queing Lai Cc: James Smith; Byrne, Ailish M; Berg, Philip Clemens Subject: Re: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows I'm not sure that I get it. You want the inactive records hidden when the tab is set to "Show Inactive?" And, by hidden, so you mean that the records simply do not show up at all, or that their single-line summaries display each with their own show/hide button? I'm trying to understand what behavior you are trying to accomplish that is different from the rest of the system. On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Queing Lai <qlai@fismaster.usc.edu> wrote: Jonathan and Ailish, Hi, I have a complex maintenance documents with a list of collection records. When this document is brought up, each inactive collection member of this document needs to be hidden with the 'show' button on. It is a 'show/hide' button for inactive records. Please let me know your advice and thank you. Bye the way, James, thank you for helping me. Queing ---- Original Message ---- From: James Smith jksmith@arizona.edu Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:42 AM To: Queing Lai Cc: Jonathan Keller; Byrne, Ailish M Subject: showing/hiding maintainableCollection rows Hi Queing. Could you send a description of the business requirement for the show/hide of records in the maintainableCollection to Jonathan and Ailish? They want to make sure they understand the issue so that they know if this behavior conforms with how show/hide works on other maintainable collections (and Jonathan and Ailish can both give more sage advice on the show/hide issue than I can). Thanks much! James

              People

              • Reporter:
                pcberg Philip Berg
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                2 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated: