Agnosticism towards "direction" of relationship links

Follow

Karl Hertz

• December 09, 2019 14:12

As a MooD Solution Builder

I want MooD not to care about the "direction" of a relationship (forward or reverse) when editing the relationship.

So That there is no difference (and no restriction) whether I choose to put the relationship on one theme or another.

Benefits coherent user experience. When I am trying to create an end user interface, the end user (and I) usually do not care about the direction of a field, only that there is a relationship and that it needs editing.

Acceptance Criteria 

1. Allow edit on fields in matrices, regardless of whether relationships are forward or reverse relationships
2. Make applicable action panels behave consistently, regardless of whether relationships are reverse or forward relationships

Customer / Originator LFV

Priority high

0

• 

  Matthew Dodd

  • February 11, 2020 16:20

  Hi Karl,

  Continuing the conversation from this thread:

  https://supportportal.moodinternational.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360007093000-Make-the-query-builder-reverse-relationships-icon-more-visible?page=1#community_comment_360001372820

  I'm interested to know what you can't do with reverse relationships? (I appreciate in terms of UI you may not care whether a relationship is forward or reverse but are there still things you cannot achieve at all?)

  Matt.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Karl Hertz

  • February 12, 2020 07:12

  Some of the main, blocking things:

  1. Edit reverse relationships in infopanels and matrices.
  2. Adding an element in focus to multiple reverse relationships from that element with "standard action panels" (e.g. "link button" or "button").
  3. Adding an element to a reverse relationship after you use "update field on element" function

  I am sure I haven't captured all the things, since I've been working around these issues for years and years. So instead of leaving the meta model as "designed", we have to go in and change it to accomodate towards these restrictions.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Karl Hertz

  • May 15, 2020 09:45

  Everybody, in particular @Kevin Fairs, this one is starting to really hurt. The ability to create consistent user interfaces whilst the need to interact with forward and reverse relationships in different ways is nigh on impossible. For instance, information panels will only allow edit of forward relationships (and maybe under some circumstances reverse relationships if they only one element).

   

  I understand that there may be limitations in the underlying structure which makes it necessary to continue having forward and reverse relationships. The ask is not to change the underlying structure so much as not to have that impact the ability to use the same mechanisms for manipulating them.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.