You are viewing limited content. For full access, please sign in.

Question

Question

Field security question (Enhancement request?)

asked on June 7, 2017

We are new users, on 10.2. We have set up fields, and share those fields on various templates (i.e. name, DOB, etc.). For some users, we have some templates that are (or should be) read-only, and some templates that are editable. However, they share most or some of the same underlying fields. From what we have seen, this is not really possible, as a change made to field security on one template affects the other templates. I was told that in 10.2.1 this is now possible, and field rights changes made to one template don't affect other templates. I want to verify this before we upgrade from 10.2 to 10.2.1.

As a background example, we have a group called "Processors". Processors use templates to route documents around, and eventually submit files to a storage location through workflows. We have another group called "Verification" that have rights to their own storage location and their own templates and workflows, but also have read-only rights to some files in the Processors file location. We don't want Verification to see templates used by Processors in day-to-day operations because it would be confusing. However, when they want to view documents in the Processors file location, they should be able to view the template/metadata associated with those documents. Right now, when they are viewing documents in the Processors location, they can see the template name, but not any of the fields. I want Verification to have edit/change rights on their template fields, read-only rights to Processor template fields, and have both templates share some/most of the underlying fields. I hope this is clear and explains what we are trying to get to. Thanks.

0 0

Replies

replied on June 7, 2017

Hi Mark, 

As you note, Field security is set on the individual fields themselves and does not take the template into account. This has not changed in 10.2.1. You can set whether a field is required based on the template it is in, but that doesn't extend to field access rights. 

If this is based on the location within the repository, would it work to give the users rights to modify the fields in field security, and then restrict the 'write metadata' entry access right to not allow them to modify metadata based on where it is in the repository? 

0 0
replied on June 7, 2017

I can try that when we get farther along in our setup. Thanks for the idea. Maybe this is something you can consider in a future release. It seems intuitive that you may want to have different field rights in different templates, so not having that capability currently limits the flexibility.

0 0
You are not allowed to follow up in this post.

Sign in to reply to this post.