Why is it that if a navigation item is configured with a model reference and includes children you are only able to configure security on the parent level and not on the children levels as well?
Why is it that if a navigation item is configured with a model reference and includes children you are only able to configure security on the parent level and not on the children levels as well?
Because use of "Include children" option get the children to inherit the parent security configuration. Then if you add new object instance the ViewApp navigation security configuration to newly added instance is maintained and follow the parent (without user need to update the ViewApp navigation model).
if you want to override the "parent inherit" and have "children" with different security configuration then you need to add a custom navigation with a reference to a single object instance as a new "parent" (and again with children or not) where you can specify different security configuration.
Thank you for your reply. I am sorry if I wasn't clear enough in the question. I am aware of the things you are saying, but my question is why is that the case, why shouldn't you be able to override the behaviour? In the galaxy we are working on, the requirement is for really granular navigartion security configuration, so it is basically needed to recreate the whole model by hand in order to implement it, which is rather cumbersome.
The hierarchy goes something like this:
The requirement is for each individual to be able to access only what is in his direct responsibility (whether it is plant level, subdepartment level, plant level...)
Hi Nenad, Thank you for clearing it, I understand your requirement and the reason you interest in it. My answer was directly to your "why" question. I believe we have this enhancement in our backlog, please reach out to Ernstvan Wyk (ErnstvanWyk2077) as he is in charge of prioritization.
Hi Nenad, Thank you for clearing it, I understand your requirement and the reason you interest in it. My answer was directly to your "why" question. I believe we have this enhancement in our backlog, please reach out to Ernstvan Wyk (ErnstvanWyk2077) as he is in charge of prioritization.