Merative Ideas Portal

Shape the future of Merative!

We invite you to shape the future of Merative, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Post your ideas

Start by posting ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,

  1. Post an idea

  2. Upvote ideas that matter most to you

  3. Get feedback from the Merative team to refine your idea

Help Merative prioritize your ideas and requests

The Merative team may need your help to refine the ideas so they may ask for more information or feedback. The offering manager team will then decide if they can begin working on your idea. If they can start during the next development cycle, they will put the idea on the priority list. Each team at Merative works on a different schedule, where some ideas can be implemented right away, others may be placed on a different schedule.

Receive notification on the decision

Some ideas can be implemented at Merative, while others may not fit within the development plans for the product. In either case, the team will let you know as soon as possible. In some cases, we may be able to find alternatives for ideas which cannot be implemented in a reasonable time.


Merative External Privacy Statement: https://www.merative.com/privacy

Add a new idea Subscribe
Status Not under consideration
Categories Social Program Management Platform
Created by Guest
Created on May 5, 2016

RELATED IDEAS

Inconsistent user experience due to validations thrown from "data marshal" being reported separately from normal fields

C�ram facades expose properties which are defined as "domain definitions". For example, a date property called "dtls$dateOfBirth" could be based on a domain definition called "CURAM_DATE". This meta-data is used to apply validations to facade properties. For example, the "dtls$dateOfBirth" property will be validated as a date automatically without C�ram developers having to code that validation.
C�ram also supports domain definitions which correspond to more complex data structures that represent multiple "fields". For example, a single facade property could contain an XML document that has multiple attributes in it which in turn are rendered as multiple fields on the screen. When the page is submitted, these individual fields are combined back into an XML document and then assigned to a single facade property again. This type of processing doesn't happen automatically; instead the C�ram framework provides a pattern for developers to follow to implement this processing.
The process of combining multiple fields like this into a single facade property is known as "data marshaling". The issue is that this marshaling phase and any validations thrown from it occur in a different phase than when "normal" fields are validated. Therefore you can have an inconsistent user experience in terms of field validations.
Consider a screen with 4 fields on it. Two are "normal" fields each mapped to a facade property. The other two are combined into an XML document and mapped to a single facade property. These groups of fields are validated in separate phases, so the user will never get validation messages for all 4 fields together. They might get validations about 2 of the fields, fix those errors, submit again and then get errors for the second two fields. The user is left wondering why the system did not report all errors together.
The customer has highlighted this behaviour with Addresses and mandatory field validations in CRM.

Customer Name New Zealand MSD
  • Attach files
  • Guest
    Reply
    |     Jan 22, 2021

    Hi Sriramganesh,

    We have re-reviewed your enhancement suggestion.

    We acknowledge the benefit of your suggested enhancement however other features are taking a priority in our planning at this time. Although we will not be addressing this item in the near term, your suggestion will be available for future consideration. This request will be closed and we will not be taking any further action.

    Thank you for taking the time to share your ideas with us. Although we cannot pursue all of the submitted suggestions, we are committed to involving our users in building our product roadmap and appreciate your ideas.

    Regards,
    Shane McFadden, SPM Offering Management team
    You can find more information on the request process here.

  • Guest
    Reply
    |     Aug 17, 2016

    Hi,

    We acknowledge that this is a valid enhancement request. It will be considered for inclusion in a future release of the product. Thank you for your interest in the Cúram product.

    Thanks,
    Eloise O'Riordan, Cúram SPM Offering Management team

  • Guest
    Reply
    |     Jun 10, 2016

    Creation of RFE from legacy PMR 5,876,999,796