After i imported the account element from the modified cvs file,the account hierarchy work well.
But when i explore the hierarchy when clicking any folder, one of the folder diasppear and become a subfolder of other. Can anyone know this problem?
I have double check my cvs file and make sure values in the account parent are correct.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
What comes to mind off-hand is the 'summary' value. Try to check that out. Also peek at the neighbouring fields. Some summary element is lurking to have made that one to fold under.
red1
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I have checked my 'account summary' values in the cvs file. I chose 'Yes' when it act as a folder/subfolder and chose 'No' for others. Then it should refer to the 'account parent' to identify the hierarchy. However, the concole shows the error 'new child is an ancestor' and it moves node. So, it change the hierarchy.
vincent
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
After i imported the account element from the modified cvs file,the account hierarchy work well.
But when i explore the hierarchy when clicking any folder, one of the folder diasppear and become a subfolder of other. Can anyone know this problem?
I have double check my cvs file and make sure values in the account parent are correct.
Hi,
What comes to mind off-hand is the 'summary' value. Try to check that out. Also peek at the neighbouring fields. Some summary element is lurking to have made that one to fold under.
red1
Hi,
I have checked my 'account summary' values in the cvs file. I chose 'Yes' when it act as a folder/subfolder and chose 'No' for others. Then it should refer to the 'account parent' to identify the hierarchy. However, the concole shows the error 'new child is an ancestor' and it moves node. So, it change the hierarchy.
vincent
Hi vincent,
So did that give u a clue? Its obvious the 'child as ancestor' is not logical. If u solve it say so, otherwise we can try something else.
red1