catalog ui policy not applying correctly

[kenneth2k1]

I have a catalog item with some variables. Some of these variables will display incorrectly at times on the catalog item view, and always on the Requested Item. There are two catalog UI policies that I am using to control the fields that the user can view when entering his form:

at order 250

at order 350

so when I go to create a new record from this catalog item, it looks like this.

The form shows my only field that I want to show. From this radio button box, they can select one of two options, and the fields will display according to the ui policies shown above

This is good, and when I first click on either option, the desired fields show as expected.

BUT... if I was to click one option and then select another after that, they do not work properly.

Here I have started by clicking MSP. The expected fields appear

Here I have started by clicking on Non-MSP/Direct. The expected fields appear

NOW, if I select MSP to start, and THEN click on non-MSP/Direct, there are fields missing, such as Detailed description and Requested completion date:

I can go back and forth, and after selecting MSP, Non-MSP/Direct will never display properly again. I have to exit out of the field.

Any advice on this? Thanks!

[Harish Murikina · Accepted solution]

Hi ken,

            The thing which we observed is what ever we gave condition to ui policy that is not working on RITM and Task after selecting check boxrun on ritm and task.

Write catalog client script and give if condition then make fields read only or man etc.

Regards,

Harish Murikinati.

[kenneth2k1]

Thanks for the reply. Ok I will give a catalog client script a shot. I just think it's frustrating that the catalog UI policy does not work as expected.

Would you have an example of a script that I can apply that would show/hide variables? I am not too good with javascript. Thank you again for your help.

[Harish Murikina]

g_form.setDisplay('variablename' true); // to show field

g_form.setDisplay('variablename' false); // to hide field

[kenneth2k1]

The help is much appreciated. I would think that something like this not working would classify as an issue.