With the help of @Mark Jongeling and @Vincent Doppenberg I got the file upload to work (misconfiguration of a storage column in my table). But now I'm facing the real problem and that's uploading files with context in mind. Meaning that I have a table that can contain multiple rows. For each row a user needs to upload one or more files. I need the context (id) of that row to be passed on dynamically in the POST request. With my limited Javascript knowledge I've consulted my friend ChatGPT along with the Code Interpreter. We came quite a way in the right direction, but sadly it misunderstood me in the end (either lost context or better prompting was needed on my side). What happens now is the following:1: A user is presented with some ‘Advice’ from a previous process.2: A user can enter multiple measures he/she can take per advice given3: A user can upload one or more files/attachments per measure(_id)What I came up with alongside Mr. GPT is the following: As you can see it appends drop
Helped, thanks :)
Got it working. It was caused by two mandatory PK columns in the ‘file’ table that were added by the detail reference. They don't get filled by the POST request, and that's what caused the 422 error. By removing them to test it out, the file(s) get uploaded. The thing is though is that I need those two PK's because the 'file’ table is a detail of another table because I want to files to uploaded for that specific row (measure_id) and for that specific tenant (tenant_id).So, I have a measure table (different measure_id, tenant_id ) → file table as detail → upload table (upload mechanism)How can I alter the POST request to do that?
I'm getting a 422 Unprocessable Entity code after uploading files. Doesn't matter if it's a jpg, pdf or whatever else. The payload seems ok to me: { "file_name": { "FileName": "Human-Total-Care-200x200.png", "File": "iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAMgAAADICAYAAACtWK6eAAAby0lEQVR42u2dd3wUZfrAJ21DSAwJySYsJFl7PysqpAChhPSEJBASMD27" }}I've shortened the base64 value because it's huge. I'm using Azure File Storage to store the attachments. It's not an access issue.I've uploaded the ‘multi.html’ file in the wwwroot folder of the Universal GUI and I made sure to change the url of the POST request to point in the right direction.Anyone run into the same problem? Thanks :)
Maybe a silly question, but is there a reason this is set up via database storage? Or is this just used for demo purposes?Asking because I'd like to use Azure file share
Thanks Sebastiaan!
How about generating unit tests? That's quite a bit more involved but especially for simple cases it should be doable already with smart prompting That's an interesting use-case! I've actually generated some unit tests for some SQL code as a test. So, prompting wise it should be doable for sure.With the new browsing functionality for GPT4+ you could give it the Thinkwise documentation for unit testing and let it generate unit tests based on those guidelines for example. We're actually curious to hear more use-cases from within the community and maybe even demo's? Let's inspire each other 🤩
Looking gooooood
Same happens for the IIS configuration document:IIS configuration | Thinkwise Documentation (thinkwisesoftware.com)
Posted an idea for this:DevExpress Word export - TableLayout property | Thinkwise Community (thinkwisesoftware.com)
I've checked the DevExpress community. There's a setting in the export function in DevExpress itself when previewing a document/report called TableLayout that you can activate which lets you modify tables in Word afterwards. https://supportcenter.devexpress.com/ticket/details/t693529/reports-tables-export-to-word Thing is, how can I implement this feature in the SF and the Print Report (export to .docx) process action?
Absolute legend of a post! I have voted on many of these topics already and will make sure I'll go through the rest of them.
I've found a way to do this. In the Html expression of the RichText control you can add the following:FormatString('<div style="font-family:Verdana; font-size:9.75pt;">{0}</div>', [column] )The only thing that's bothering me is the extra padding in red that gets added for the <p> paragraph that's bold. Tried to overwrite it in the above code and via the following solution but it didn't work: Stil curious if anybody knows of another way!
It's me from another account. This is resolved (although with a different use case :P) with the above method.
I got it working with above method.Image URL: The url to the filestorage (https://storage.file.core.windows.net/images/ for example) Expression: The parameter containing the url to the image + the generated SAS token for that specific storage/container/fileshare
Will try this out asap and report back with my findings!
You're right. It works when I enter the ‘Rony.test@arboned.nl’ as a value. I was under the impression that ‘arboned’ was enough because of the ‘of bevat element’ thing, thinking it would work as a ‘like ‘%arboned%’’ operator. I'll see what they can provide us! Thanks
Hi @Arie V, I'm up to date with the latest hotfixes!
Good morning,We've almost got it working. The external users are being provisioned (created and updated) in IAM, but for some reason the user groups aren't being assigned. Considering that the iss claim isn't unique enough in our case (two tenants in one Azure AD on their side) we've added the upn claim to map to. The upn claim ends with ‘@tenant1.nl’ or ‘@tenant2.nl’ depending on the tenant the user belongs to.Tenant 1 Tenant 2So what we thought we could do is the following:User template: upn claim for the tenant with one of the tenants as the default value, it seems this field cannot be emptyUser group template:We fill the ‘Gelijk aan of bevat element’ column with the name of the tenants, as they are included in the upn value, as you can see two screenshots aboveTenant mapping: We do the same for the Tenant mapping. This all looks good in our eyes, but it seems the upn claim isn't being recognized? Are we missing something here? Thanks!
Thanks for pointing us in the right direction. We're going to look into it and I'll update the topic when I know more!
Thanks for the quick response. What if the iss is the same url for both tenants? The client has one active directory in which all the users are saved from both tenants. Is there another possible claim we could use for the tenant identification?
Seemed to be a caching problem. It works! Well except for the non-editable HTML-field, but I'll figure that one out.Thanks for the help!
Hi there,I've changed the css back to have the !important property. I can see my rule when I visit /custom.css: I also see it in the computed tab now as well: But for some reason still no change in my application:Is it somehow because it's an expression field? Thanks in advance.
Hi,There were some errors in the custom.css file pertaining to the use of !important and that the use of the textarea element before the .disabled class is overqualified. I've got rid of those to be sure and the errors are gone. There's another style change in the file that works. This is the css that's applied to the color property: For both the .non-edit and the .edit mode it still uses the rgba style instead of the solid black property. This is my custom.css file:
Hi,Thanks for the quick response.Good to know about the generated classes, I'll make sure to avoid those in the future. I've tried your given solution but sadly it doesn't seem to do anything to the text. I've tried changing some things, but to no avail. I've restarted my application several times as well to be sure. Any ideas?
Already have an account? Login
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
