Symphony.

Ok that really helps actually, definitely understand it a little more!

Which other fields?

The ones I mentioned :)

Is this similar with SSM etc.? I never quite know what to set that number at whether it be for the SBL, SBL+ or SSM, et al. because why would you ever want anything less than all of the results (at least when it's not datasource controlled and therefore just an arbitrary selection)?

+

I only tend to interact with it for the SBL, and then just stick a load of 9's in it, as why would I want anything less than all the results? As even if I wanted to improve performance how would the SBL know which ones I wanted to include?

Appreciate you may not know the intention here, was just wondering really!

Association Field is a fork of Select Box Link with a few additions to attach the new interfaces. Select Box Link Plus is extending Select Box Link. So the limit settings are exactly the same.

Regarding Subsection Manager, I can't remember that it used a limit actually.

As even if I wanted to improve performance how would the SBL know which ones I wanted to include?

It doesn't :) The limit is really just there for performance reasons not because it's helpful in any other way.

With the Selector UI it's a bit different. Although the extension still doesn't know exactly which entries you'd like to select, the search results are more specific due to the term you entered. So the more you enter, the better the still stupidly limited results will get because in the end your target will be one single entry which will always fall into a range larger than zero.

Thanks for your time and explanations NIls - appreciate it!

Definitely much clearer in my head now! Would love to see some benchmarking at some point for different data types, as there are likely best practices for how to use the limit, like the alphabet and ID example you provided.

Fun activity for a rainy day ;)

(You're likely right with SSM btw, I'm probably just mis-remembering)

When trying to create the Reflectionfield markup for a thumbnail/title to appear in the selector I'm able to grab the entry/image/filename and entry/title as expected but the image is not shown as the rest of the path is missing.

I'm not sure how to write the path to my image, which in this playground test install is simply in /workspace.

<img src="{$workspace}/{entry/image/filename}" /> {entry/title}

Doesn't fetch the workspace path and something weird like

<img src="../../../../workspace/{entry/image/filename}" /> {entry/title}

would only work in this case when creating a new entry as the browser address changes on save or re-edit.

Of course ideally I'd like to

<img src="{$root}image/2/80/0/5/{entry/image/filename}" /> {entry/title}

Or my thumbnail will be huge.

What's the correct sytax?

I needed to add my own reference to the site root and workspace into the reflectionfield in order to do what you are trying to achieve: https://github.com/orchard-studio/reflectionfield/commit/55095a959edee25f6306718302404060dad58cb5

I also added @designermonkeys referenced code for creation and edited dates in to the output in order to use as reflected values.

To grab workspace, you just need to include it like this: '{workspace}' without the '$' symbol.

Oh nice! Hadn't used reflection field before, and thought the params would be hanging around somewhere already to be plucked.

Using some image off my desktop that is quite large does not break the selector, obviously daft test but it shows the UI is robust.

Cheers moonoo2!

Since all the AI-stuff requires the integration branch, which has now already become Symphony 2.5 I’m starting to wonder if 2.5 will break some extensions already updated for 2.4? I very much hope this is not the case.

@Nils By the way. Can you give a very brief status on how the AI is getting along? :)

I’m starting to wonder if 2.5 will break some extensions already updated for 2.4? I very much hope this is not the case.

At least not on purpose... ;)

We're switching to Semantic Versioning with this release, so 2.5.0 means added functionality while maintaining backwards compatibility.

Breaking changes will (hopefully) only happen in major releases (3.0.0) going forward.

@Nils By the way. Can you give a very brief status on how the AI is getting along? :)

Yes, I can:

1. Association Field just needs to get the latest changes from SBL merged in.
2. Association UI Selector is in beta and is ready from a feature point of view.
3. Association Output is in beta and is feature-complete as well.
4. Association UI Editor is in the works.
5. All needed core changes are done.

#1 to #3 are ready to use with Symphony's integration (#5) branch – feedback and bug reports are very welcome. We'll release those extensions as soon as Symphony 2.5 is out.

There should be something testable for #4 by the end of next week.

@jens sounds reasonable, thanks for elaborating!

@nils sounds good, looking forward to test the whole bunch together!

There should be something testable for #4 by the end of next week.

Sweet!

@nils I'm from the USA and am having trouble donating to Associations through the PayPal form as it is telling me in German that I'm missing a State and there is no State field showing up.

Can I send you money via an alternative like Square Cash or is that not available in Deutschland?

Never heard of Square Cash. You could try sending the donation from your PayPal account directly to buero@hananils.de. If that doesn't work out, please contact us via mail. Thanks!

@nils I have a test build running and this is really incredible! What work will I need to do to port over SSM content in a legacy database. Is this something that hana+nils would be open to taking on once the Associations interface is complete. We have some a Section with several thousand entries and others with smaller numbers.

There have been a few requests to handle migration already, see https://github.com/symphonists/association_field/issues/3. But there are no specific plans yet.

Upgrading from SBL is simple because Association Field is just a fork. Upgrading from SSM is bit more complex. If we create a migration assistent, this should be a separate extensions. In general, we are open for suggestions.

@nils I appreciate the information. This is very helpful. I'm eager to test the Association Editor!

Am I correct in assuming that the Association UI sort by dragging is not yet implemented?

I tried dragging but nothing works as of yet.

It's implemented already. Did you select the correct interface? There are two: one with and one without sorting.

I selected the one with sorting and it gives me the grabber cursor on hover but I can't drag anything. I'll try in a different browser and see if this is browser-related.

Now when I try to change the options in my Datasource I get this error:

My apologies Nils this happens when I edit the Section that contains the Association fields.