How to define smart collection rules to match a folder's path?

I was hoping to define a tree of (smart) collections to match my folders tree, but coming up with a search criteria to match the folder path is proving difficult at best, impossible at worst.
Any ideas?

Hi John,
John R. Ellis wrote:
Perhaps the best you can do is
Folder contains words f1 f2 ... fn
where f1..fn are the elements of the path of the folder
Yes, that's exactly what I came up with, and for many folders it's correct, but for others - not so much...
Reminder: Using double spaces between words gets around the "big mallard ducks" (contains words) bug.
PS - I went ahead and purchased AnyFilter - I'll see what I can do with it :-)
Thanks,
Rob

Similar Messages

How to define the copy rules in master contract

Hi,
Could you please help me on how to define the copy rule in master contract . I cann't find the link,it's not under IMG/SD/sales/contract/master contract/define referencing prodecures.
Thanks/Cindy

Hi Sai,
I'm afraid VTAA may not resolve my problem. What I want is to define the copy rule. When you go into IMG/SD/sales/contracts/master contract/define referencing requirments/define reference procedure you will find there is a copy rule in field area. What I really want is to define that copy rule.
Thanks

How to define Template Selection Rules according to doc language code

hi All,
I am using ucm10g, I need to use DC to convert word to html, by defining Template Selection Rules, it worked perfect.
Question is I have to use different template for different content that use different languages, for example, if a content has a primary file writing in English, that content will be checked in with langCode attribute of "en", and according to this langCode attribute, I will use different template that will show "nextpage" or "previouspage" according to langCode field, other content will use other template that show "nextpage" or "previouspage" in other language.
I donot think the fields used in Template Selection Rules(such as author, type, profile) in ucm10g can be used in this case, any suggestion?
Best regards

I will ask easier.
is it possible to set in RSCUR -> Exchange rate type 'Y' and Exchange rate from InfoObject '0EXRATE_ACC' AND use it in BEx?
If yes, how, if now why?
Thank you
Standa

Smart collection rules do not include smart collection itself

All my pictures are eventually set into collections. I also use smart collections to make sure I can retrieve items like MALLARD in a smart collection called DUCKS. So I created yet another smart collection NOT IN COLLECTIONS to make sure I did not oversee including recently imported pictures into a (set of) collection(s).
Unfortunately, the rules for smart collection do not include the smart collection ITSELF, so though MALLARD is in a (smart) collection by default, it also appears in NOT IN COLLECTIONS, which sort of defeat the purpose of assigning a picture to a collection automatically.
Any idea if this is a user error, a bug or should it be a request for a future improvement?
Windows XP SP3 LR 2.3

Not an error, neither a bug. It's by design.
You could post a feature request in the FR forum or the official Adobe wishlist.

How to Define new Date rules

Hi ,
I have a requirement in my project, where in i have to create some new date rules. I've searched the whole web to find any document which explains the XML for Date rules but couldn't find any. Does any one know what that XML means, and how to create new Date rules ?
Please reply
Krishna-

Hi
it just calculates new dates base on reference dates or abap function modules.
In IMG in Date management node you can create your own date rules.
Best would be to copy existing one and than modify it.
Please read this thread about this: Date rules editor - file format documentation availability
Regards
Radek

How to Define Multiple Notification Rules for Different E-Mail Channels?

In C4C we can define a notification rule for New tickets, for example, that provides an acknowledgement of receiving the customer's e-mail.
This works great for a single support team, but what if we have multiple support teams, each with their own e-mail address, and each with unique requirements for their auto-acknowledgement?
When setting up a new notification rule, there doesn't appear to be any option to define the e-mail channel, service and support team value, or a "from" e-mail address.
We're on-boarding over a dozen e-mail teams, and I'd hate to tell them that they'll all have to share one auto-acknowledgement template from a single do-not-reply address.
Does anyone know if this is possible to:
Define the e-mail channel or service and support team as an condition in the notification rules.
Define the outgoing "from" e-mail address for a notification rule.
Thanks for any insight the community might have!
Mike
T-Mobile USA

Hi Mike,
As of release 1402, your analysis is correct. The out-of-the-box notification rules do not include the "incoming email channel" as one of fields on which to build condition, and all notifications are sent from a common do-not-reply address.
You can easily overcome the first limitation by using the SDK. For example, when the ticket is created you could set an extension field based on the email channel, and then use the extension field to define different notification rules, using different templates. All extension fields are automatically available to be used as conditions.
Thank you for your feedback and for bringing this item to our attention. We will definitely keep this in mind as we plan for future releases.
Kind regards,
Gabriele Bodda
Product Management

Dvt:Graph How to define own Style Rule Bundle

Hi,
I need help in defining style rule bundle in the backing bean to be used in the styleRuleBundle tag of dvt:graph
say for example I nee need to define the follwing rule...
All data value points below 50 should display in green
from 50-80 it should be yellow and 80-100 must be red in colour...
regards

Add to your resource bundle:
af_dvt_hv.fetchingData=Your textDario

Is it possible to define a smart collection rule that does not interpret a space as an implied 'OR'?

For example, I want the rule to trigger when the target contains "brown hair".
It should trigger when the target is "blue eyes, brown hair and ruby lips..." but *not* trigger when the target is "blonde hair and brown eyes".
Thanks,
Rob

Hi,
Can you check the "collection_of_record_type" you are using, because it works fine for me....plz make sure that table "Test" and the "collection_of_record_type" contains same number of attributes.
SBH

How to define complex reconciliation rule

i have to do reconciliation with some complex rule but if i see reconciliation rule we can only define simple rule like userid = samAccountName. Please suggest how we can define complex rule.
thanks in adv.

http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E14049_01/doc.9101/e14061/busrule.htm#BIBJEFCG

How to define an aggregation rule for a dimension based on bridge table?

Hello,
I need a solution for aggregating data correctly when using a dimension based on a set of dimensione tables containing a bridge table. Please find below a description of my business case and the OBIEE model which I’ve created thus far.
Business Case
The company involved wants to report on the number of support cases, the different types of actions that were taken and the people involved in those actions. One support case will undergo a number of actions (called ‘handelingen’) until it is closed. For each action at least one person is involved performing a specific role, but there can also be multiple persons involved with 1 action, each performing a different role for that action. This is the N : N part of the model.
The problem that I face is visible in the two pictures below:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/sample.png
As long as I don’t include anything from the Dimension Meelezer in my report, I get the correct number of handelingen (7). When I include the person (called ‘Meelezer’), the measuere per action is multiplied by the number of persons/roles involved with that action.
When I changed the Aggregation rule in the report column #Handelingen to ‘Server Complex Aggregate’ I do get the correct endtotal:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/sample2.png
I believe it should be possible to define in the repository a different aggregation rule for individual dimensions, but I’ve not been able to achieve this.
Explained below is what I have created in my Physical and Business Model & Mapping layers:
The Physical Model is built like this:
(This is just a small part of a much larger physical model, but I’ve only included the most relevant tables)
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/PhysicalDiagram-1.png
The Fact table (ALS Feit Zaakverloop) contains FK’s for the action (FK_HANDELING, joined to ALS Dim Handeling), the date the action took place (FK_DATUM_ZAAKVERLOOP, joined to ALS Dim Datum Zaakverloop) and the uniqe group of people involved (FK_MEELEZERS, joined to ALS Groep Meelezers) and a measure column (SUM_HANDELINGEN) populated with the value ‘1’ for each row.
The Bridge table (ALS Brug Meelezer/Reden Meelezen) contains three FK’s: FK_GR_MEELEZERS (joined to ALS Groep Meelezers), FK_MEELEZER (joined to ALS Dim Functionaris) and FK_REDEN_MEELEZEN (joined to ALS Dim Reden Meelezen).
The Business Model
In the business model, the four physical tables for the N:N relation have been combined into one logical dimension table.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/BusinessModel-1.png
DIM Meelezer contains one LTS in which the four physical tables have been combined:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/LTS1.png
And all the required locical columns have been created:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/LTS2.png
DIM Meelezer has also been identified as a bridge table and a Business Key has been defined on a combination of the FK’s in the bridge table and business codes of the two dimension tables.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/BMDIM.png
Next a hierachy was created for Dim Meelezer:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/Hier.png
In Feit Zaakverloop, a measurement called ‘# Handelingen’ was created using SUM_HANDELINGEN, with an aggregation rule of SUM.
In the LTS of both the DIM Meelezer and Feit Zaakverloop, the Logical Content Levels have both been set to: LVL Detail – Meelezer.
Please provide suggestions that will NOT require changes to the physical datamodel as they would require too much time to achieve (or at leats would not be ready before my deadline.
Thanks!
Edited by: The_Dutchman on Dec 13, 2011 11:43 AM

Hmm, no replies yet...
Am I in 'uncharted territory' with this issue?

How to define new derivation rules in FM module

Can somebody help me define a new derivation rule which is user specific in FM module. I want to map muliple Fund Centers to a single Cost center and also map many commitment items to a single GL.
Thanks
shivaji

You derive object X (fund centre) from object (Y) cost centre. In terms of logic, it's not possible to derive multiple values from single value. That's the concept of derivation. If you have cost centre (let's say ABCD), on what parameter will your logic decide whether to take fund centre XXXX or fund centre YYYY? As you understand, the FM posting should be done eventually on one fund centre as well as commitment item, fund, etc.
After all, the computer could be told what ever you have to tell it; if you, yourself, can make this decision - which FCtr should be taken - upon certain logic, it could be programmed as well in FMDERIVE.

Ehancement: ability to compound smart Collection rules

Need a collection that is: Not rated & No stars & No color -OR- Not rated & No stars & Yellow.
Defaulting the "Match" dropdown to "all" and adding a new "+-" AND/OR dropdown would make the above logic possible. This would also make possible many more selection criteria.
I am aware that sometimes you can reverse all the criteria and achive the same result, but not always, and then it becomes difficult to make slight changes without redoing everything.

You can create nested boolean ANDs and ORs by holding down the Alt key and clicking the "#" button on the right (click on the image below to see at full resolution):
Clearly not an obvious user-interface design...

Smart Collection matching a multi-word Keyword

I have the following multi-word keywords:
"through the years"
"kelly through the years"
"mike through the years"
I want to create a smart collection which only matches if the keyword is "through the years". I do not want the smart collection to match the other two.
Is this possible?

I agree that this is a design oversight that should be corrected. However, one could argue that a keyword entirely contained in another should be represented by a hierarchy. While the OP does not make it clear what the relationship is between "through the years" alone and "kelly through the years" it would seem that the concept of "kelly through the years" would be better represented with keyword beneath "through the years" and as such would not need to contain the string "through the years".
Also the OP states that the keyword "Kelly" exists on it's own and is distinct from "kelly through the years". It is not clear to me why just the keywords "through the years" and "Kelly" could not exist as flat keyword (no hierarchy). To achieve the concept of "kelly through the years" you would apply both. Then a simple AND condition would find the desired images.
In short I think this is a case of a flawed keyword hierarchy.
Again I agree that an exact match option should be provided.
-Josh

Smart Collection features I don't see in LR4 beta and wonder why not

I've been playing with the new LR4 beta for all of 10 minutes now, and am disappointed to see that Smart Collections haven't moved forward at all.
Things I'd hoped to see:
In the Edit Smart Collection window, why when you add a new rule does it always default to "Rating"? How is that the most likely thing I want? Sure, make it the default for the first rule, but thereafter, I think it would be a lot more useful if it added another rule of the type on the line you pressed '+' on. That is, if I have a "Keywords...Doesn't Contain" rule and press the '+' button on that line, there's a better chance that I want another such rule than that I want yet another "Rating" rule.
Continuing the previous, I think the second rule added should follow slightly different logic. If the default Rating rule wasn't changed to a different type, the default for the second rule shouldn't be "Rating" again to clone the first rule, but rather pick the second most likely rule type. Does Adobe have usage statistics for people's Smart Collections to draw on?
For Keywords rules, there aren't negative operators to match all of the positive operators. So we have Contains, and Doesn't Contain, but we have Contains All and lack Doesn't Contain Any, and we have Contains Words but not Doesn't Contain Words. You can get the desired effect by nesting the positive version in a "None of the following are true" sub-rule, but this feels clumsy. Either give us a symmetric set of logical operators, or take away the negatives and give a clean way to negate arbitrary rules without nesting rules when not needed.
Nested rule sets aren't discoverable. I stumbled across this feature by accident, and only then because I knew how to do the same in iTunes. I'd rather see a third button to the right of each rule line that gave a way to create a nesting than the current magic Option trick. One of the great things about Lightroom is how discoverable most things are; you scarcely need the manual. This is a sharp corner than needs to be knocked off.
There's still no way to refer to one Smart Collection from another! iTunes has had this since approximately forever. It is very useful to be able to extract common rule sets from multiple Smart Collections and simply refer to it from others. We call this the DRY Principle in programming, and it's a Good Thing.
No new Smart Collection rule types. At minimum, I'd hoped to see rules for megapixels and pixel dimensions. I'd like to be able to find all the pics with a long edge 640 pixels or less, for example. Megapixels is actually less useful, because it can be fooled by high aspect ratio images. A banner 4000 px wide and 100 px tall is "only" 0.4 Mpx, but it probably doesn't need to be any bigger. (Yes, I'm aware of Jeffrey Friedl's plugin. He wants this built into LR4, too. )
We don't even get one new rule having to do with geoencoding. Just off the top of my head, I'd kind of like to have a Smart Collection that found photos taken within 100 feet of my home's lat/long and didn't contain the keyword "home". I have many such Smart Collections in a Collection Set called "Warnings", each of which automatically checks my photos for something that I often forget.
You can't reorder rules or move them into or out of groups. I have Smart Collections with a dozen or so rules, and some with logic nested three levels. When assembling such complex little beasts, it isn't always clear while building it what logic order will give the desired result. You have to iterate, and that often means taking a perfectly good rule and moving it somewhere else. Lacking the ability to reorganize the existing rules, that means creating a new "Rating" rule, changing its type to match, cut-and-pasting the match criteria [if text] and deleting the old rule. Pfagh.
That's enough for now.

Ooops, found one new Smart Collection rule: "Metadata Status". One. Want more.

Smart Collection - can source be named Collection Set?

If I specify a smart collection rule that says the source must be a collection matching some pattern, does this only apply to actual collections and exclude collection sets?
I was hoping fo a way to build a rule based on the collection set ... is this possible?
I also tried matching Any Searchable Text set to the collection set name, but that doesn't seem to work...wouldn't all photos in the collection set be associated with that string? Looks like no.
-Colin
PS: There used to be a way I thought that you could submit a new thread after doing a question search. That seems to be gone. Or did I miss something?

CPChisholm wrote:
If I specify a smart collection rule that says the source must be a collection matching some pattern, does this only apply to actual collections and exclude collection sets?
If I remember correctly, yes.
John Ellis' AnyFilter lets you include collection set name (if I remember correctly).
Rob

How to define smart collection rules to match a folder's path?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for