In Rhythmyx 6.0 we have two content items related through a regular slot. It is required that an item cannot go Public unless it’s related content is Public as well. So I changed Allowed Relationship Type of a slot to AA-Mandatory. Now if I Submit this item for approval (while related item is still in Edit), Rhythmyx gives me the error (see attached). Is this normal? If it is, how would I handle it gracefully?
Furthermore, if in this Error dialog I choose Yes, my item is allowed to go Public nevertheless. If No, it doesn’t revert back to Edit but rather moves to Awaiting Edit Approval and then it can be pushed to Publish without problems.
I think that the behavior of AA Mandatory isn’t really related to your problem, which appears to be an LDAP error.
Remember that Rhythmyx isn’t really “transactional” in that sense. Multi-step operations don’t get “rolled back”, they just stop at whatever step in the process the error occurs in.
In this case, it seems (from the error) that you were doing a multi-select operation. I encourage you to report the LDAP issue to Tech Support.
One other thing to remember about AA Mandatory is that changing the Relationship on a slot only affects new entries in that slot. If you have an existing entry that uses “normal AA”, changing the slot definition won’t change this existing entry.
The “intended behavior” is that items which are approved but have mandatory relationships that are not “fulfilled” are supposed to remain in the last state before they enter a Public state. Normally, this is the “Pending” state, although you are free to re-arrange your workflow.
When the last item is in pending, the items move together into the public state.
Items may be approved through intermediate states until they reach the state before the public state.
[QUOTE=slolic;461]One more question:
Is it possible to apply a relatioship that would also prevent item from going Public if corresponding related content isn’t linked to the slot at all?[/QUOTE]
For this you need a Validation rather than a relationship.
In older versions, this ALWAYS required a Java Extension. In 6.x, there are some ways to build validation expressions, but I don’t know if there’s one that can work on the “size” of the contents of a slot.