I am in the process of defining WTDocuments and I was wondering if it was a best practice to soft type the WTDocument object so as to not "tarnish" the OOTB WTDocument object? I have heard this is a best practice for WTParts but I was wondering about WTDocuments. Thanks in advance.
Patrick Williams | Engineering Systems | c: 616.947.2110 [cid:image001.jpg@01CE0838.22E29AF0]
If you need only one light type of document now, then it is possible that you might need another light type of document in the future.
If you add soft attributes to the Document node, then any future subtype will inherit those attributes - somthing that may not make sense for your new type.
As a result, you are better off making a sub type to add your attributes and a new icon and new rules so that in the future if you ever need another, then you are free to wither subtype your subtype, or (more likely) make an entirely new type that isn't encumbered by the original subtypes' attributes, icon, rules, etc.
So in your experience it is best to always soft type the WTDocument for a specific purpose (attributes, life cycle, workflow) and if need be create additional soft types as children of the original soft type or of WTDocument itself?
Patrick Williams | Engineering Systems | c: 616.947.2110 [cid:image001.jpg@01CE0845.B0A03CA0]
What about soft typing links? For example I want to add an additional attribute to the Part Usage Link. Would you soft type this link to add the new attribute? How do I then force the soft typed Part Usage Link to be used?
Patrick Williams | Engineering Systems | c: 616.947.2110 [cid:image002.jpg@01CE0846.6F22AF00]