[KULRICE-9916] Do checkbox conversion in LookupInputField only when specified through attribute definition Created: 17/Jul/13  Updated: 21/Apr/14  Resolved: 22/Jul/13

Status: Closed
Project: Kuali Rice Development
Component/s: Development
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: 2.4
Security Level: Public (Public: Anyone can view)

Type: Task Priority: Major
Reporter: Claus Niesen Assignee: Claus Niesen
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Issue Links:
Relate
is related to KULRICE-5390 Lookup - Implement search field conve... Closed
Similar issues:
KULRICE-10121Attribute Definition: Conversion Script
KULRICE-10120Attribute Definition: Conversion Guide
KULRICE-6721Document search does not work properly with KNS Attribute Definitions
KULRICE-11549Conversion Script- When tranforming MaintainableFieldDefinition, the name attribute is the only one being transformed.
KULRICE-6860Add support for specifying multiple default values for an attribute definition or field
KULRICE-9489Determine best way to determine whether KRAD criteria fields treat wildcards and operators as literals
KULRICE-7643DTOConverter#convertWorkflowAttributeDefinition only looks for a definition by name now
KULRICE-7415BO Notes do not save through notes tag
KULRICE-13844Attribute definitions for document objects not getting picked up by view helper
KULRICE-4118Checkbox Controls associated with Kim attributes are not displaying correctly
Epic Link: Lookup Equivalence
Rice Module:
KRAD
KRAD Feature Area:
Lookup
Application Requirement:
Rice
KAI Review Status: Not Required
KTI Review Status: Not Required
Code Review Status: Not Required
Include in Release Notes?:
Yes

 Description   

For LookupInputField convert the checkboxes only when it comes from the attribute definition.

Jerry's request/observation:

It seems we only do the textarea control conversion if it comes from the attribute definition, but we convert checkboxes in all cases. Is there a reason for the difference? It makes sense to me that we only convert controls if it comes from the AttributeDefinition. If they set the control explicitly on the field, we should probably just allow it.

Jerry also suggest the following improvement:

For converting from the checkbox to the radio group. We inject the radio group for one case, and build it using the component factory in another case. I would just build a bean for the radio group with a set id, then if it is determined you need to convert the control call the component factory to get that bean by id. That way it is configured in the XML, but we only get it if needed.


Generated at Wed Jun 03 04:48:45 CDT 2020 using JIRA 6.1.5#6160-sha1:a61a0fc278117a0da0ec9b89167b8f29b6afdab2.