Defining metadata at the folder level.

Question

We are migrating from Content DB to Webcenter Content 11.1.1.7, using FrameworkFolders.
Our old Content Management solution (Content DB), allowed us to define metadata on a folder level. For example a group of metadata (a category in Content DB) could be defined and applied to a specific folder. When documents are uploaded, the server enforces the metadata to be populated for all documents uploaded to that folder and all child folders.
Webcenter Content seems to behave quite differently. From what I can tell, this is set up in the "Configuration Manager" Admin applet. Metadata fields are defined in the "Information Fields" tab. Sets of fields are defined as a "Rule". Roles are enforced on uploaded content through "Profiles". A given profile is enforced by the user of a "Trigger". The trigger is specified to look at a specific field, which is global to everything on the server. This is all documented here: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E23943_01/doc.1111/e10978/c04_metadata.htm#DAFJDCEH
Having the trigger field be global seems to be very restrictive. We will have several different systems storing content on the server. Isn't this a big limitation of the product?
How can create a rule to enforce metadata to be populated for all content that is uploaded to a folder?
Thanks!

Answer 1

I'd say the answer is: create a folder and assign it a set of metadata (and inherit, if you will).
I don't think WebCenter Content, or UCM, has a concept equal to the mentioned category as described; i.e. an object that represents a metadata settings that can be assigned to 'something'. There are, however, many concepts that are close:
- rules/profiles mentioned in the initial posts - a profile (consisting of rules) may correlate to a "content type". It defines what fields make sense for this particular content item, what is required, default, etc. (relationship between fields). The caveat is that profiles define actually just how content items behave in the GUI; (global) rules can enhance also back-end processing (e.g. fill in an automated contentID identifier, if missing), but in reality they don't define data model
- folders - folders help to define hierarchy on items. As Srinath explained, we can also benefit from propagation of metadata, or inheritance. This is probably the closest concept to the Content DB category, but the holder is not the category, but the folder itself. Keep also in mind that folder is an optional parameter, and metadata inherited from a folder can be overriden for both items and folders
- in URM, where the categorization is more strict is another hierarchical structure; retention category (which can be assigned other settings, esp. disposition rules, and which can contain retention folders)
- yet, another concept that might be useful in some use cases are folios; a folio is an item (XML-file) that has its own metadata, and can reference other content items. However, operations on a folio item OOTB does not affect contained content items, and a content item can be referenced by several folios.
Finally, if no standard concept helps, you may always create your own customization via filters. A filter is a Java piece of code, which can be "hooked" to standard events (like "uploading a file", or check-in as it is called in UCM) and which can do whatever validation you like. For instance, I created a component which checks that an assigned quota on a folder to which an item is uploaded is not exceeded.
I assume that for your use case, you might be good to go with a combination of folders and profiles (a profile setting can also be assigned to a folder as default metadata). Let us know if you get stuck.