Skip to main content
Solved

How can I add a published parameter that is multiple choice with alias with a tree?

  • January 31, 2020
  • 2 replies
  • 245 views

fmelizard
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+20

I want to create a published parameter that will give users the option of choosing multiple options from a dropdown/tree list, depending on the category.

 

I could use 'Choice with Alias (Multiple)' and then an AttributeValueMapper, but I'd rather not as the 'Choice (Multiple)' has the ability to 'Use Tree'

 

 

Best answer by jlutherthomas

Hi @fmelizard,

 

 

You can do this by editing the configuration string in the Parameter Definition dialog. Add FME_DELIM:.% to the beginning of the configuration string.

 

You can change the '.' to be any delimiter you'd like (but ensure it's not present in any of your display or lookup values)

 

 

Start with 'Choice with Alias (Multiple)' and set up your configuration using your chosen delimiter value between node levels. At this point, if you use the dropdown for 'Default Value' and click 'Change Selection' it will look like this:

 

 

 

Now, add the FME_DELIM:.% to the beginning of the Configuration string:

 

 

You can see that the '.' delimiter has split my configuration values into different node levels and we can now use the tree view.

 

 

The % separates different choice options.

The , separates the display names from the values.

This post is closed to further activity.
It may be an old question, an answered question, an implemented idea, or a notification-only post.
Please check post dates before relying on any information in a question or answer.
For follow-up or related questions, please post a new question or idea.
If there is a genuine update to be made, please contact us and request that the post is reopened.

2 replies

Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • 364 replies
  • Best Answer
  • January 31, 2020

Hi @fmelizard,

 

 

You can do this by editing the configuration string in the Parameter Definition dialog. Add FME_DELIM:.% to the beginning of the configuration string.

 

You can change the '.' to be any delimiter you'd like (but ensure it's not present in any of your display or lookup values)

 

 

Start with 'Choice with Alias (Multiple)' and set up your configuration using your chosen delimiter value between node levels. At this point, if you use the dropdown for 'Default Value' and click 'Change Selection' it will look like this:

 

 

 

Now, add the FME_DELIM:.% to the beginning of the Configuration string:

 

 

You can see that the '.' delimiter has split my configuration values into different node levels and we can now use the tree view.

 

 

The % separates different choice options.

The , separates the display names from the values.


tomw202
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Contributor
  • 18 replies
  • July 3, 2020

Hi @fmelizard,

 

 

You can do this by editing the configuration string in the Parameter Definition dialog. Add FME_DELIM:.% to the beginning of the configuration string.

 

You can change the '.' to be any delimiter you'd like (but ensure it's not present in any of your display or lookup values)

 

 

Start with 'Choice with Alias (Multiple)' and set up your configuration using your chosen delimiter value between node levels. At this point, if you use the dropdown for 'Default Value' and click 'Change Selection' it will look like this:

 

 

 

Now, add the FME_DELIM:.% to the beginning of the Configuration string:

 

 

You can see that the '.' delimiter has split my configuration values into different node levels and we can now use the tree view.

 

 

The % separates different choice options.

The , separates the display names from the values.

Hi @jlutherthomas,@fmelizard

I've got the same requirements, so thanks for posting this workaround. Your solution works well when defining the tree, as per my example below:

Clicking to select a default value brings up a tree view:

 

However, at run time, when we actually get the user to pick parameters, the tree view is not visible:

 

Is there something I'm missing, or is this expected behavour?

Thanks