Alloy Ideas Portal

Welcome to the Alloy Ideas Portal đź‘‹ Here, you'll be able to browse improvement ideas raised by our community, vote on ideas you agree with or even raise your own ideas. We review all ideas raised and we endeavour to respond to all raised ideas.

Any ideas submitted will be immediately visible on the portal for others to vote on, please do not include anything in your ideas you do not wish to be shared with others.

Add a new idea Subscribe
Status Already exists
Product Alloy Web
Created by Guest
Created on May 24, 2023

RELATED IDEAS

Standardising the SG Electrical and SG Structure Condition fields on the General tab for fresh input

Dear Alloy,

I attach a word document explaining a change to the system I would like to see implemented to stop a dual selection in a certain field

Alloy suggestio...
Alloy suggestion_230524_Standarise Condition fields on the General tab.docx
 Alloy suggestion_230524_Standarise Condition fields on the General tab.docx
Open full size
Alloy suggestion_230524_Standarise Condition fields on the General tab.docx
  • Attach files
  • Admin
    Jonathan Shaw
    Reply
    |     May 30, 2023

    Hi!


    Thanks for raising this idea.


    It sounds like you have different settings for those two attributes. I have a feeling the SG Electrical Condition attribute is set to Max 1 and the SG Structural Condition attribute has a Max set to >1 or to nothing at all, hence why the picker is allowing you to select multiple values.


    If you could get in touch with the administrator in your organisation, they should be able to check the configuration of the design and update it within Alloy to limit the number of options you can select for SG Structural Condition.


    I'll leave this idea open for now, could you let me know how that goes in case just in case there is something else going on.


    Thanks!

    Jon