cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Constraint on Category > why via Referenced Item Type?

Amethyst

Constraint on Category > why via Referenced Item Type?

Hi! We are using the SE Solution, where the category for the type requirement is constrained in the following way:

 

Constrained Method: Field Relationsship

Source Field: Referenced Item Type

Source Values: Shared Requirement

Constrained Field: Category

Allowed Values: Heading, ...

 

Can someone explain me why "Referenced Item Type = Shared Requirement" is used here? Why not just "Type = Requirement"? Would that make a difference?

 

Thanks

Timo

Tags (2)
2 REPLIES 2

Re: Constraint on Category > why via Referenced Item Type?

Hi Timo,

The purpose of the constraint is to restrict the category value based on the type of content the node (requirement) is pointing to (the shared item). The shared item could for example be a Document or a Shared Requirement and usually the constraint you identified below is always paired with a similar document version of the constraint.

 

Source Field: Referenced Item Type

Source Values: Requirement Document

Constrained Field: Category

Allowed Values: Document

 

So to answer your question: A node is always going to be the same type, but the type of the shared item can vary.

 

Hope that helps!

-Andrew

Re: Constraint on Category > why via Referenced Item Type?

Hi Andrew, I do not understand it yet. The constraint is defined on the type "Requirement". How can the shared item vary? It is always the "Shared Requirement"?

 

What is the difference to:

1. Basic Constraint; Constrained Field = Category; Allowed Value = Heading, ...

2. Field Relationship; Source Field Type = Requirement; Constrained Field = Category; Allowed Value = Heading, ...

Won't these two constraints work as well?

 

Regards, Timo