I have searched the forum for an answer but were unable to find one. Can anyone shine his light on the following?
I want to be able to grant my users (with their settings synchronized with with GEDCOM Data) to change their OWN data.
For example, where they lived, worked and let them upload their own pictures, without giving them edit or change rights for the ENTIRE site.
I'm pretty sure someone asked this question earlier but I'm unable to find anything on it.
Can someone please advise?
Thank you.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Claokin
All or nothing for the edit rights. But remember - you approve or disapprove all changes and you are responsible for training your users, so you could always easily disapprove unwanted changes and send them a warning. Not sure why you'd want to lock out the other contributions, but this is not possible. You could remove those tags from the GUI, but then you'd have to use RAW EDIT to add or modify them when you wished to do so (set Raw to Admin only).
-Stephen
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Used to be that if you set access to ACCESS ONLY (no edit rights at all) and set the INDI-ID to the user's record, that user could see others, but could also change his own record. We considered this a bug as the user had no edit rights, and I think it was squashed, but you could test and see. Otherwise, NO - there is no setting as such.
Stephen
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
cloakin & Stephen:
FYI: I happen to be signed in with access only rights to my PGV and no, there's no ability for me to edit my own record. "Edit" does not appear beside any event/fact in my record. Which IMHO, is how it should be.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Mac
Oh, we concur. Access rights should never allow EDIT, although - as I said earlier - there was a bug that did so. I think creating an instance where someone could only edit one record - their own - is a lot of effort for nothing and the reason it was not added when the bug was squashed.
Stephen
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Dear All,
I have searched the forum for an answer but were unable to find one. Can anyone shine his light on the following?
I want to be able to grant my users (with their settings synchronized with with GEDCOM Data) to change their OWN data.
For example, where they lived, worked and let them upload their own pictures, without giving them edit or change rights for the ENTIRE site.
I'm pretty sure someone asked this question earlier but I'm unable to find anything on it.
Can someone please advise?
Thank you.
Claokin
All or nothing for the edit rights. But remember - you approve or disapprove all changes and you are responsible for training your users, so you could always easily disapprove unwanted changes and send them a warning. Not sure why you'd want to lock out the other contributions, but this is not possible. You could remove those tags from the GUI, but then you'd have to use RAW EDIT to add or modify them when you wished to do so (set Raw to Admin only).
-Stephen
Is there no way to let an individual user change only his/her own data, by validating the user with the ID in the web address?
Used to be that if you set access to ACCESS ONLY (no edit rights at all) and set the INDI-ID to the user's record, that user could see others, but could also change his own record. We considered this a bug as the user had no edit rights, and I think it was squashed, but you could test and see. Otherwise, NO - there is no setting as such.
Stephen
cloakin & Stephen:
FYI: I happen to be signed in with access only rights to my PGV and no, there's no ability for me to edit my own record. "Edit" does not appear beside any event/fact in my record. Which IMHO, is how it should be.
Mac
Oh, we concur. Access rights should never allow EDIT, although - as I said earlier - there was a bug that did so. I think creating an instance where someone could only edit one record - their own - is a lot of effort for nothing and the reason it was not added when the bug was squashed.
Stephen
IIRC, this feature was removed because it provided a back-door to allow users to access private data.
All they needed to do was "marry" a private person, and it opened up details to that person……