Compliance Kit - Manager Properties - Auto Calculated Properties - Set a property on another object

You may need an extra step in the process to do that. At first you create a relation FROM the invoice to the report if I understand you correctly. That does not change anything on the report itself. However, you can use Managed Properties to automatically created the reverse relation on the report by adding a "invoice" property on the report. Once that is in place it is fairly simple to set a boolean property to True if the "invoice" property is not empty. Perhaps you don't even need the boolean property when the "invoice" property is there?

Hello,

Thanks for your help, I think I understood your point but we're already doing that.
We have on the report's metadata card a property "Invoices" and if we link an invoice there the boolean is set to true ON the report (Customer's request by the way)

However, what we want is the other way round : linking a report TO the invoice and setting the linked report's boolean to true.

I have attached here a screen, hope it helps to understand

Not sure that I fully understand, because your screenshot confirms my original understanding that you are working on the Invoice where you add a relation FROM invoice TO report, and then you want to set a boolean property on the report. However, your text says that you have a relation FROM the report To the invoice, but that relation is not visible in your screenshot. It may, of course, be outside the visible area of the metadata card.

If my understanding still is correct, I want you to use Managed Properties to add a reverse relation (Liaisons á d'autress documents) on the report pointing back to the invoice. When that happens you can easily add a rule to also set "Traité" as True.

Hi,

I think I got your point, however I don't know how to "add" that reverse relation with the Managed Properties ?
I suppose I need to create an "Auto Calculated properties" with the "invoice" property and set it with a dynamic value which is the invoice previously edited with the linked reports. Moreover, the calculation rule would be filtered on the report, right ?

Would you mind giving me more tips on how to do that ?

Thank you very much
Claudio

It can be done in the "Properties" section (not the Auto Calculated Properties). See the configuration manual section 4.7.2. https://kb.cloudvault.m-files.com/Default.aspx?#3ECA226F-7B54-428B-B539-DE443E6134EC/object/95ED33E1-0389-4F2E-AD73-47012CB6867F/latest

The idea is to add "Liaisons á d'autress documents" on your report, so you select this as Property in your configuration. In this case the same property is used as Reference Property. No Matching Properties required. Filter settings depends on your structure and requirements. You probably don't want this new property on all types of reports....

Have never had a case where the Reference Property is the same as the Property in this type of configuration. Don't know if that will create any problems.

Hi,

Thank you very much for your help, we never had the occasion to try the Properties section in the Managed Properties Configuration. It's very tricky, I think it's hard at the beginning to understand the context of Host, Target, Reference Prop, etc...

We actually found the solution with my colleague :

Nouvelle(s) Facture is the Prop contained in the report and Rapport(s) de chantier is the prop contained in the invoice (the one we are actually using in this case)
Cool to know that this also has a reverse behaviour, if you unlink the report in the invoice, the linked report's invoices are unlinked as well

Hello. We have similar case. Except we can define relation to multiple objects, and need to set backward relation on all of them.
This is the configuration

This works, if we select single object "Ponudba" (1), referenced relation is  automatically set properly in field "Naročilnica" (2)

As soon as i select multiple objects of "Ponudba" error is raised.
Any idea how can I solve this problem?

Can we have the details of the error message please

Nevermind, we had a missconfiguration on our side...started to work as expected now.