Community Tip - Your Friends List is a way to easily have access to the community members that you interact with the most! X
I would like to have the Category field displayed for ALM_Test Obective items. It is already on the presentation but for some reason doesn't show when you create or edit a test objective. Also, it's not available when I search for it under visible fields. Could someone fill me in on what I'm missing?
Solved! Go to Solution.
fva's as such are very generic and you can use them for sure for a lot of use cases.
But the Category fva should rather be used for documents and nodes only.
Also, when I go to Visible Fields, Category isn't available as an option.
Hello Nolin,
the category field in Integrity is of type fva (=field value attribute), and is intended to mirror the shared category.
Both fields are important for the document model of Integrity.
As I understand, you like to reuse them for a non-document type.
From my experience I'd say that you choose rather another field, and leave the category dedicated to documents only.
The 'other field' can for sure be a pick list, which you might create as a new field.
Does this answer and help?
Volker
Volker,
I think that does. So you're saying fva's are intended to only be used with segments and nodes?
Thanks,
Nolin
fva's as such are very generic and you can use them for sure for a lot of use cases.
But the Category fva should rather be used for documents and nodes only.
That makes sense. I will make another field for this purpose. Any idea what would prevent the field from showing up though?
Hi Nolin,
some of the Integrity fields are driven by the type and classifcations you choose when setting up the type itself. Those fields usually are the internal fields, which have an internal negative id. You can get them by typing
im fields --fields=id,name
All fields with a negative value are Integrity specific, and serve a certain functionality. Be careful when you use them for a different purpose as they are intended. The category and shared category are among them.
Volker
Ah-ha! That explains it. Thank you for the follow up and explanation!