Reference fields to sc_req_item table are not showing display value

[Brian Bouchard]

It seems anywhere we have a reference field that refers back to the sc_req_item table the reference field is not showing the RITM number as expected. I have confirmed that Number is set to Display=true, but we still cannot see the actual RITM #s 

Examples: When looking at a PO Line Item should refers back to a RITMin the "Request Line" field, the value appears blank on the form, However, if you click the information icon to the right of the field, you can drill into the correct RITM, so we know it's assigned properly.

On notifications based on the sc_req_item table, when you do a preview and point to a specific right, the Preview Record field says "Requested Item:"  instead of the actual RITM number.

Approvals records for RITMs behave the same way as notifications previews.

Any thoughts on what could be causing this?  It feels like it's something on the RITM table definition since it seems to be affecting all the placed where a field is referencing this table, but I can't find anything that explains what's happening.

[Brian Bouchard]

For the heck of it, I tried to set a Dictionary override for the number field on sc_req_item and got the following message:

There is already a display value override for this table

However, looking at the related list I don't see any overrides defined.

[Brian Bouchard]

after my last update I went directly to the Dictionary Override table and found the override for the Display field.  unset the overrride and everything began working as expected.  I'm not sure why it wasn't showing when i was looking at the column definition in the Dictionary Override related list, but I was able to resolve this issue by going straight to the table instead.

Thanks for all your help.

[nataliya_b]

did you check if there were any client scripts "onchange" for this field, that might cause clearing value?

[Mark Roethof]

Hi there,

Can you confirm that the reference itself is correct? For example if you look at the XML of one of those records, is the sys_id set on that field? And just the display value missing?

If my answer helped you in any way, please then mark it as helpful.

Kind regards,
Mark

---

LinkedIn

[Brian Bouchard]

Hi Mark - I can confirm the fields are actually populated and pointing to the correct records. It's just that they aren't displaying properly.