Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Senaite labels #2276

Merged
merged 87 commits into from
Mar 26, 2023
Merged

Senaite labels #2276

merged 87 commits into from
Mar 26, 2023

Conversation

ramonski
Copy link
Contributor

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses

This PR introduces labels for SENAITE:

Labels — SENAITE LIMS 2023-03-17 12 PM-38-19

Basically all AT/DX contents can be configured to have labels via the SENAITE registry, unless they define their schema solely over a behavior, e.g. a DataBox.
In this case, the extended label field does not appear in the edit view, but the contents can be still labeled programmatically with the provided Label API.

OK — SENAITE LIMS 2023-03-17 12 PM-41-44

The extended label field queries existing labels that have been created in the "Labels" setup folder, but allow also to enter arbitrary labels for a specific object.

Object labels are stored in the annotation storage to avoid attribute clashes and define extend the following field to the object:

  • AT Content Types: ExtLabels
  • DX Content Types: ext_labels

When a label is assigned to an object, the object will be cataloged in the senaite_catalog_label catalog.

The labels index allows to search for all labeled objects in SENAITE.

Current behavior before PR

No labels available

Desired behavior after PR is merged

All objects can be labeled

--
I confirm I have tested this PR thoroughly and coded it according to PEP8
and Plone's Python styleguide standards.

@xispa xispa merged commit 699219a into 2.x Mar 26, 2023
@xispa xispa deleted the senaite-labels branch March 26, 2023 06:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants