Skip to content

Schema: conditional-visibility rule editor #20

Description

@Adron

Scope

A column can be shown/hidden based on another column's value:

{ "key": "studentId", "type": "text", "label": "Student ID",
  "visibility": { "condition": { "field": "ticketType", "operator": "equals", "value": "student" } } }

Operators

equals, notEquals, contains, notContains, greaterThan, lessThan, greaterThanOrEqual, lessThanOrEqual, isEmpty, isNotEmpty (the last two ignore value).

Documented semantics to honor

  • Visibility controls form display. A hidden column is skipped during row validation while empty — so a required column hidden by its condition is not enforced until the condition makes it visible.
  • Conditions may only reference columns appearing earlier in fields; visibility is evaluated in displayOrder.
  • One condition per column — there is no and/or grouping.

Acceptance criteria

  • Rule builder: watched field (restricted to earlier columns), operator, value.
  • The row editor evaluates conditions live, showing/hiding fields as values change.
  • Hidden-and-empty required fields are not blocked client-side, matching server behaviour.

Activity

  1. Adron commented on Sep 16, 2026

    @Adron
    MemberAuthor

    Live-verified findings from the schema service (#17 / PR #143) — three change the design here

    ⚠️ 1. The non-destructive properties form accepts only SIX types, not twelve

    400 Unknown propertyType 'textarea'. Allowed: text, number, boolean, date, url, email
    

    propertyType is also mandatory on every item (omitting it gives the same error for 'undefined'/'null').

    Consequence: a list using textarea, datetime, tel, select, multiselect or priority cannot be edited non-destructively at all — every change to it has to go through the destructive DSL rebuild. That is a real, permanent constraint on #22's guard, not an edge case: the moment a user picks one of the six richer types in #18's builder, they lose safe editing on that list forever.

    Exposed as ListFieldType.PropertiesEditable and ListSchema.SupportsPropertiesEdit so the UI can tell the user before they choose.

    2. "Destructive" means columns, not rows — so #22's confirmation copy must not say "rows will be deleted"

    Confirmed live. The DSL rebuild:

    • drops and recreates every column with a new id, losing any validation / options / visibility the new DSL omits;
    • leaves rows intact, but values whose keys no longer exist are orphaned in rowData — still stored, not shown, not validated.

    And it renames the list: schema.name overwrote the title ('ZZ Throwaway Schema Probe' → 'ZZ Renamed By DSL Rebuild'), and schema.description overwrites the list description too — clearing it when omitted. #22's confirmation needs to say all three things.

    3. Deleting a data-bearing column requires ?force=true

    409 {…, "propertiesWithData": ["link"]}
    

    ?force=true then strips that key from every row. The shared EnsureSuccessAsync discards the propertiesWithData array, so a dedicated ListSchemaException carries Issues / PropertiesWithData / RequiresForce. #18 should name the affected columns in its confirmation rather than showing a bare 409.

    4. The server never validates conditional visibility — #20 must

    An unknown operator, a missing watched key, and a forward reference all return 200 and then silently never match. So there is no server-side safety net: ListSchema.Validate() does these checks client-side, and #20's editor should surface them rather than letting a rule quietly do nothing.

    5. properties PUT definitively preserves row data — #22's guard is sound

    A rename + column-add on a list holding two rows returned 200 and both rows came back with identical ids, identical version (still 1), and identical rowData. Column ids were preserved too, and the validationRules / helpText / visibilityCondition that the properties shape cannot even express survived untouched.

    Note the envelope differs between the two directions: GET returns {"data":{…}}, the properties PUT returns {"properties":[…]} ordered by displayOrder — no data wrapper.

    6. Schema-less lists are unaffected

    Created without a schema they answer {"data":{"name":"<list title>","description":…,"fields":[]}} and accept rows with arbitrary, even nested, keys. Unknown keys are accepted on a schema'd list too — nothing is stripped. fields: [] cannot be PUT back (DSL must have at least one field), so ListSchema.Validate() catches that locally.

    Also relevant to #21

    Row-write validation returns 422 with details:[{field,message}], which the current plumbing flattens — so #21 can't currently attach a message to the offending field without unpacking that itself.

    Separately, #144/PR #146 fixed a crash on the row-read path (ListDataRow.ListId was required but absent) and modelled version, which is the hook for optimistic concurrency on row edits.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    P2Deptharea:listsArea: listsparityWeb/API feature-parity work

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions