[MGNLFORM-166] Summary component - using labels instead of "field names" as identifiers Created: 15/May/13 Updated: 19/May/22 Resolved: 19/May/22 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Magnolia Form Module |
| Component/s: | field |
| Affects Version/s: | 1.4.5 |
| Fix Version/s: | 2.2.x |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Neutral |
| Reporter: | Adrien Berthou | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Won't Do | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | form, next, quickwin | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Template: |
|
| Acceptance criteria: |
Empty
|
| Task DoD: |
[ ]*
Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]*
Downstream builds green?
[ ]*
Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]*
Tests
[ ]*
FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ] 
Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
|
| Bug DoR: |
[ ]*
Steps to reproduce, expected, and actual results filled
[ ]*
Affected version filled
|
| Date of First Response: |
| Description |
|
Intro: There are cases when a user wants two fields to have the same name. One obvious would be having two fieldsets (one for a billing address & one for shipping address) having the same fields (fname, lname, street & so on). Problem: When adding two fields with different field names but the same label, the summary page will only display one of the fields value. Source of issue: I believe this is coming from info.magnolia.module.form.templates.components.FormSummaryModel, templateParams.put(title, value); - line 186 - templateParams matches labels to values, so when we have two labels of the same name the value of the first one is overriden Note: The summary component does seem to have quite a few issues (may have been left out for a while) & might need to be recoded. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Adrien Berthou [ 15/May/13 ] |
|
Part of the solution could be: modify templateParams so that it matches "field names" to an object holding "at least" labels & value (you may want to include the fieldset name too). |
| Comment by Roman Kovařík [ 19/May/22 ] |
|
Hello, This ticket is now marked as closed due to one of the following reasons:
If you are still facing a problem or consider this issue still relevant, please feel free to re-open the ticket and we will reach out to you. Thank you, |