I need to map task items to potentially different parent options.
Currently the control lineage is this:
This causes a long list of needless creation for a simple task that does not need a breakdown.
If I permit the task to be managed from any of these heiarchies, then I can add the detail where needed, and reduce when not. **This I can do**
What I can't do is to define the parent object through a linking picklist, because I can only (currently) pick from one list.
How can I pick from a list of all three workspaces?
Project, Section, and Group.
Anyone have any ideas?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Currently you cannot create one Linking Picklist that is made up of the records from multiple workspaces.
Since it sounds like you have a business need for this feature, may I suggest that you post this idea on our Autodesk PLM 360 Idea Exchange forum to potentially be incorporated in the product?
Thanks. Can you think of another workaround for this?
We perform product development occasionally (where we need the part numbering cascaded throughout the project) and then analysis jobs where we only need a project and the task, without the additional tiers of control.
My only solution at this point is to either:
Kill the parent link and manually enter the control code from the parent.
Kill the extra lower component group tier, and force the task to the higher tier (Design Section)
(Less control when I need it, but I rarely need that)
Create a duplicate task, ones that simply map to separate picklists of each workspace (ugghhh)
Any better suggestions?
for situations like this I have created multiple picklists in a section. one pointing to each workspace, then you only use one depending on the situation.
I wondering if there is scope to hide the fields in dedicated sections based on the one you put a value into via scripting. But I doubt it.
Great idea Scott,
John - will this solution work for you in having all three linking picklists available from one record?
Scott's full of ideas. problem is that behavior script takes parent data, and develops the control ID. With three fields, I'd need to do bounds checking to see which field was not null.
I think I'll just use the middle tier idea. The other option is to lose the parent link, which would truly suck.
I'd have to go to project management to get home, plus the display name would be confusing. arrrgggghhhh..
John showed this to me a little while ago, and I was thought about a possible solution for you, it is outside of the norm, but if you are looking for a on the fly 3 tier link between multiple workspaces linking between each other. Why not use the BOM tab?
This would give you the ability to instantly link items from different workspaces and when needing to create a new item you can do that as well. Also this would allow you to do some loop back linking for parent child relationships as well.
Not sure it will work with your idea / needs but it is an alternate method.
Let me know if you want to chat more about this.
It won't in this case, but it is something to keep in mine.
What I did was scrap my 3rd tier and allow the system to link subsequent 2nd tiers, one behind the other.
This allows me to build as deep and more finite as I want, and manage items as deep as I need (or shallow).
The 3rd tier was simply a cloned 2nd tier workspace, renamed. Each was puposed separately, but I simply permitted tasking from the 2nd tier, and revised the behavior scripts. It actually cleaned things up a bit.
You all were a great help. Thanks for the effort.
I tried it, using some bounds checking in the behavior scripts. It did work, along with a 'one or the other' validation.
I realzed that I could go more streamlined and solve the problem. I posted that below in a reply to Joe.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register
Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.