Enable uploading Collection Relationships in the WorkBench when Collection Object is the base table #5842
Replies: 9 comments
-
Hi @grantfitzsimmons - just wondering if Jason was able to provide a way to do this. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Actually, I tested it out, and if my understanding of collection relationships is correct, then this bug is resolved in #4929 (I heavily refactored and reimplemented collection relationships in workbench, and this was a side-effect). That is, the mapping worked out of the box for me. Here is the mapping I used, and was able to successfully upload into different collection. @zoewarner1 your best bet would be to wait that release out. I'll need to add unit tests for this. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Ok, thanks very much for quick response @realVinayak |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@zoewarner1 ofcourse! You should still try using collectionrelationships as the base table (instead of collectionobject) which is supported right now -- can't think of cases where that won't work or any bugs at the top of my head, are there in your case? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
No bugs at the moment using collectionrelationships as base table :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Actually maybe bug? @realVinayak |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@zoewarner1 Ah, yes, sorry that's a limitation. Yeah, removing those rows manually is needed, just because the basetable is collectionrelationship. If you remove all the values in that row, it should ignore it -- but that's equivalent (almost) to removing the row itself. In single upload though, simply putting blank values for the CollectionRelType mapping should be enough though. Just for sanity, you're getting something like The ignore when blank just applies to matching (and not uploads). This is because blank values are ignored when uploading. In your case it isn't because you likely have some other values on that row, so that's why removing all values from that row will also do the trick. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@realVinayak Ah yes, I see! Removing the row is probably easier than removing all the values in the 'orphan' rows, but I understand now re: ignore when blank for matching (not uploads). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@zoewarner1 ding ding ding, you found a bug! I'm able to recreate it if collectionreltype's fields are all null. Yeah, that's gonna be a "won't fix" for a WHILE -- too complicated, even after the reimplementation branch. I'm actually gonna crash more loudly than that, a bit more useful error message to users. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Willem at SAIAB is requesting the ability to upload and create collection relationships when the Collection Object table is the base table by simply uploading through the right side rels matching to collection objects on the other side of the relationship by
catalogNumber
.See the mapping that he had created before realizing this is not currently possible:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2a5f/e2a5ff011ae7b61a3410f61ba34c1ccb6099438a" alt="image"
The mapping specifies the relationship name and the catalog number, which theoretically should be all that you need.
I spoke to @melton-jason about this and he believes there may be a way to do this currently, but most likely with a less intuitive workflow. The mapping he created should work out of the box.
Requested By: Willem at SAIAB
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions