nelsa Member since 2019 7 posts
Posted: 1 month ago
Last activity: 1 month 1 week ago

Reasoning for best practice messages on Design Template and Full Section Editor

A section previously existed using Full Section Editor which used properties grouped inside layouts to control visiblity conditions for different groups of properties. During an upgrade this was switched back to a design template. This stripped the layouts and the visibility conditions within them. Easy enough to find and fix but in the interest of preventing this in the future I was curious why and if I could better follow Pega's interests. I am guessing this was done because of the message on layouts stating the use of Full Section Editor does not follow best practices of using a design template and gives a link to convert it back without any checks or warnings. On the other side, the Design Template gives a similar message and link stating you can access full design capabilities. This makes it sound desirable and I feel it is. My concern is why would using pretty standard functionalities such as layouts be considered not a best practice? Following that, is it expected or better to not have groupings and use a visibility condition on each individual property on a design template or does it just need to be regrouped when converting it back? I am asking because resolving this issue made me realize that I almost never use design templates. It feels very restrictive and is more difficult to visualize designs. When I troubleshoot sections, I immediately convert to full section editor and I usually leave it.

Is this wrong?

What are others ideas on this?


Maybe for another discussion is why this removed paragraph spacing?

Pega Platform 8.4 User Interface Senior System Architect
Share this page LinkedIn