It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Sorting by custom enumeration name

Jeremy Upright (2145) | asked Mar 21 '14, 5:32 p.m.
When I create a query and sort the results based on a custom enumeration in a custom attribute, it appears that the results are sorted on the literal value rather than the named value.  My PMR was closed stating this is functioning as designed, but would like further input to understand if this should be a Defect or Enhancement Request.  Below is an example scenario:

RTC Project Area (created per application) includes an attribute called PMO Project.  This attribute contains the following enumerations that were create when the project are was first established:

P00012345 - PMO Project A (literal value = l1)
P00023456 - PMO Project A (literal value = l2)

Then a year later and new enumeration needs to be added as follows:
P00012346 - PMO Project AB (literal value = l3)

If user creates a query and wants to sort on PMO Project attribute, then the results are returned as follows (based on literal value):
P00012345 - PMO Project A (literal value = l1)
P00023456 - PMO Project A (literal value = l2)
P00012346 - PMO Project AB (literal value = l3)

User can not see literal value, and is expecting the results to appear as:
P00012345 - PMO Project A (literal value = l1)
P00012346 - PMO Project AB (literal value = l3)
P00023456 - PMO Project A (literal value = l2)

Does anyone know if this in fact functioning as designed or should this be considered as a defect?  We are currently using RTC 4.0.3.

Thanks for any support/feedback!

Donald Nong commented Mar 24 '14, 2:25 a.m.

Based on WYSIWYG, if you sort the result based on the values that you see, I would expect it literally does that. If it does not, I would argue that it is a defect.

2 answers

permanent link
Piotr Aniola (3.7k11638) | answered Mar 25 '14, 8:17 a.m.
There is an open enhancement to have this implemented, unfortunately, scheduled for backlog:

permanent link
Ana Carolina Silva de Toledo (131) | answered Sep 20 '18, 6:13 p.m.
Do we have any updates of this enhancement?

I think we might have a defect as well on this.

This is the setup I have of an enumeration in my RTC

 <enumeration attributeTypeId="usSMEPriority" name="WI Prioritization">
                 <literal default="true" icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l1" name="Unassigned" null="true"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l2" name="1"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l3" name="2"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l4" name="3"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l5" name="4"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l6" name="5"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l7" name="6"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l8" name="7"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l9" name="8"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l10" name="9"/>
                 <literal icon="" id="usSMEPriority.literal.l11" name="10"/>

When I query by this enumeration, this is the results I have

Seems like it's ordering by the literal that starts with l1 (eg: l1, l10, l11, l2, l21, l3, etc) . Is there anyway to update the literal value? If could update to l01, l02, l03 intead of starting with l1, l2, l3

Your answer

Register or to post your answer.