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

Question

Question

Rename Entry on a multiple value field?

asked on July 22, 2015

Hi guys,

A customer has multiple sites for which they want to store contract documents which can apply to one or many sites.  As it's a single document they don't want to have to store it in multiple locations/folders, just have a "Contracts" folder then name the document along the lines of "Site - Contract Type - Date".

The token for the multiple value Site field in "Rename Entry" is %(RetrieveFieldValues_Site_All) which works fine with a single site, but only ever displays the first site if there are multiple values.  I'm guessing this is probably working as designed but was wondering if there is a way around this or if you can suggest another approach I should try?

Thanks,

Mike

0 0

Answer

SELECTED ANSWER
replied on July 23, 2015 Show version history

What do you want the name to look when you have multiple sites? What if the name goes over the maximum length for document/folder names?

You're right about the behavior being by design: multi-value tokens used in single value fields only use their first value. You can, however, turn multi-value tokens into strings containing all values as a delimited list by using token indexing.

 

0 0

Replies

replied on July 23, 2015

Hi Mike,

 

Once you retrieve the field values for the multi value field in workflow, you will need something to iterate through the different values and do something. The best way to handle this is to use the "for each value" loop and iterate through the results of the multi value field. You could create a copy of the document in each place you want it or have it stored in one location and have shortcuts placed in each other location based on what you tell it to do within the "for each value" activity. It could look something like this:-

 

Hope this points you in the right direction! smileyyes

 

 

1 0
replied on July 23, 2015

Thanks for your replies guys, I will get the customer to rethink the requirement as I am of the understanding that if it's for more than three or four sites then it will apply to all sites and we can have an "All Sites" entry, however if that changes at some stage in the future then the naming won't work as Miruna has pointed out, so Chris's approach may be required.

Thank you!

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

Sign in to reply to this post.