Flexibility in hiding and positioning fields in a form by (ISV) end-user

Hello William,

I get your point, but when your idea would be implemented, don’t you think your work as a developer could become very difficult? I can imagine that, when an end user could get the possibilities to remove a field from their overview in the form, the chances are pretty big that this action becomes forgotten. Then you as a developer could get the question to reinstate this field, which means extra, unnecessary work and time.

Are the variants of a subject not a more manageable option to solve your question? 

Hello Bart,

We work as a ISV. Our consultants implement and configure the standard application specific for that customer. Without using the SF. The consultants implement the same software at 100+ different customers. 

The suggestion that the customer asks to reinstate a specific field is in a ISV situation never asked at the developer. But will be asked at the application manager of that customer or at the consultant.

When we should implement my wish. It should also be possible to configure the autorisation of the fields in the forms in IAM. Because sometimes the costomar will decide with the consultant that some fields in the forms can be removed. 

Hello William,

Since version 2020.1 of our suite we support hidden columns for all components.

It is a setting in IAM and works application wide. So for the same table you can choose which columns should be hidden.
 

For more information see https://docs.thinkwisesoftware.com/docs/iam_admin/admin_applications.html#application-preferences

Is this a solution that could work for you?

I hope to hear from you soon.

Kind Regards,

Roel

Hello Roel,

Thanx for your reply. A beautifull functionality. This solution is a small step in what i like to achieve. The most important thing is flexibility for the end-user. Secondly flexibility for the end-customer.  90% of our end-customers will work from a multi tenant environment. Your sugestion does not work in a mult tenant.  

Hey William,

It would work if every tenant had its own application in IAM. Every application can use the same database and the same GUI. Or is there a reason why not every tenant can have its own application?

Kind Regards,

Roel

Hey Roel,

Our situation is that we have one application. I don't know de reasons for that?

Hi William,

I understand you only have one application, but you can configure IAM so that it can have multiple (tenant-specific) instances of the same application, which all use the same model and the same database.

Adding a tenant-specific instance takes virtually no time. Go to Applications, add a new application and configure it to use the same project version and database. You can use the application alias as an identifier for the tenant.

When you have created an application per tenant, you can configure the hidden fields for this tenant-specific application as described earlier by Roel.

Users would be put into user groups based on the tenant. Granting the tenant-specific user groups roles in the tenant-specific application would then cause the hidden fields to work as desired - only for this specific tenant.

Hi Anne,

I appreciate your tips.

I am not a specialist on tenants. That is a specific deployment and installation department at Acto. I am almost sure there are many dependendies. Even when it would be possible. Than we only solved a small part of my wish. I will look in to it.

The most flexibel solution for us as a ISV in a form is simular functionality as in a list. It gives us, the customer and the end-user maximum flexibility. It should be possible in the model to give this extra functionality in the user preferences and in IAM.