Developer forum

Forum » Integration » Updating language independent fields through integration

Updating language independent fields through integration

Imar Spaanjaars Dynamicweb Employee
Imar Spaanjaars
Reply

Hi there,

I have a product field called "Blocked for Ecommerce" that determines if an item can be sent to a remote system. My solution contains multiple languages and I marked the field as "Do not allow changes across languages". When I update the field in the primary language, its value gets copied over to the others, which is exactly as it should be.

However, in integration we're only importing products into the primary language. When I import a product, the field's value is applied to the product in the primary language correctly, but not in the others.

I have two questions about this:

  1. Is this by design? I assume so, as the copying probably takes place in the API whereas integration goes to the database directly?
  2. What is the recommended approach for this? I can think of a few solutions, but none is too pretty:
    1. Use a subscriber after import to set the values on the other languages
    2. Use a table script to find the same product in other languages and update accordingly.
    3. Set up another job to use the same XML file but use the Dynamicweb provider to target the products in all languages and just update this field.

Any other ideas? I feel this topic comes up quite often so it would be nice to have support for it in the product or at least have formal guidance on how to do it.

Thanks!

Imar

 


Replies

 
Nuno Aguiar Dynamicweb Employee
Nuno Aguiar
Reply

Hi Imar,

 

+1 on those.

 

We also feel there's too much of a disconnect between the Integration Providers and the API logic. Maybe when using a provider such as "Order", "Ecommerce" and "Users", there should be, the objects should be instantied and an API Save event triggered, so that it would take any notification subscribers into account too.

 

BR

Nuno Aguiar

 
Adrian Ursu Dynamicweb Employee
Adrian Ursu
Reply

+1 from us as well

We are usually using option 2.3 from Imar's list but I agree it's not pretty, especially when the integration job takes a lot of time. You block the system for a long time in order to run the integration twice.

A standard solution would be very useful.


Adrian 

 
Imar Spaanjaars Dynamicweb Employee
Imar Spaanjaars
Reply

Bump. Any opinion from someone on the development team,?

Imar

 

You must be logged in to post in the forum