nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

Is it possible to add additional folder layers?

dalequalls

RM is a great feature!

Is there any way to add additional layers of nested folders at any (or all) levels, such as:

File Plan > Series > Category > Folder >Sub Folder > Sub Sub Folder > Sub Sub Sub Folder

In our environment (legal), we would use it something like this:

File Plan > Litigation > Client Number > Matter Number> Correspondence > Plaintiff
                                                                                > Correspondence > Defendant
                                                                                > Documents > Briefs
                                                                                > Documents > Motions

The ability to do more nesting would be huge. Is it possible in the existing product?

Thanks!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mrogers

Nope. While technically it is quite easy there is actually code in place to prevent folders within folders. It was a DOD requirement.

However you can have arbitary depth nested series, which may be what you are looking for.

mikeh

Just to make a slight correction here: the DOD specification states the fixed structure is:

Series -> Category -> Folder -> Record

There's no scope in the specification to nest Series (or Category or Folder), unfortunately.

Thanks,
Mike

loftux

I've been searching the standard to find where it says that you only can have 3 classification/folder-levels, and could find it (only used pdf search, so it may be in there in some wording). So this is how I interpret the standard:
You can have any number of nested folders or categories, but you cannot have different types at the same level
That is Series -> CategoryA -> CategoryAB -> FolderA -> FolderAB -> Record
Once you created a CategoryAB you wouldn't be allowed to add a Folder to CategoryA, or if CategoryA has a folder, you wouldn't be allowed to add subcategory CategoryAB. Same goes for folder, as long as there is no Record in a Folder, you can add subfolders.

At least this would be a more useful scenario, but it may very well be that the standard mandates no nesting.

dalequalls

Very interesting.

Thanks for the info, it's much appreciated!

kgeis

I also cannot find any place in the DoD spec that requires three levels. Besides, most requirements in 5015.2 are not of the sort "thou shalt not have more than three levels" but more like "thou shall at least support a this kind of hierarchy."

It looks like Oracle supports multiple levels of series, categories and folders. Personally, I can only understand structure inside a record folder. MoReq requires this; DoD folders correspond to MoReq files, and MoReq has subfiles.

v912485

For this reason I'm now installing version 3. 😞
RM in 3.2 is totally useless for us.

carlos_miguens

The DoD standard does not mandate three levels specifically. It has 3 file plan components as Mike correctly states, Series, Category and Folder. However it does not allow for nesting of Series or Category, i.e. it does not allow a category within a category. It does not prevent adding additional folder levels, this would an implementation decision. Hence you may find that some systems allow this. One of the problems with existing records managment systems is the complexity - we wanted to keep things simple - at least to begin with. Based on feedback we'll review how we can best change this going forward.

Underneath the covers each of these file plan components is simply an aggregation object, so the restriction is not hard-baked - we can add additional levels later.

Just some notes on the discussion about standards and the implementation.

With DoD the disposal schedule is held at the category level, this is the reason I think that nesting categories is not allowed. Does not mean that it can't be handled, MoReq2 allows for nested disposal schedules, but implementing and testing this becomes far more complex.

MoReq has a classification scheme (file plan) which can be any depth, but you still cannot nest folders (called files in MoReq2 - just to confuse

), the nesting is at the higher (class) level. There are various rules about files in classes, etc. MoReq2 also supports the notion of sub-files, but these also have restrictions, if you have sub-files all records need to go into the sub-files at a particular level.

Implementing some of this can be difficult, but it makes even more complex for users to understand. Take the simple example of adding nested folders to the existing Alfresco implementation, currently the implementation supports operational actions at the folder level, things such as close, cutoff, re-open, un-cutoff, freeze, transfer, unfreeze, etc. If these operations could be done on nested folders, then it becomes complex for a records manager to work out what is happening to sub-folders with these types of operations. We just need to work out a way of allowing this, which is simple enough for records managers to understand, yet powerful enough to be useful.

Once categories (nested tags) becomes available in Share you may be able to do what you want with those, I think categories will appear before nested folders.

v912485

It does not prevent adding additional folder levels, this would an implementation decision.

I'm sure it's not that hard to make this option configurable. This way administrators have the option to enforce "simplicity", or enable enhanced nested folders.

Thanks, Allan

carlos_miguens

Everyone on this thread.

I've created a JIRA improvement request (https://issues.alfresco.com/jira/browse/RM-79) for additional folder layers. We will have to work out how the actions work on sub-folders, but in the spirit of simple records management the folder actions (cutoff, close, etc.) will probably only be available on the leaf nodes of the fileplan.

Thanks
Carlos

joey2

While this enhancement has been requested and considered… we hope.

In the meantime, you can add one non-record folder after the record folder. You can then move records into such folder.

In other words, you can create a folder structure like: Series -> Category -> Folder -> "Normal" Folder -> Record

A bit of a limitation but we got by exploiting this for now.

Hope this helps.

- Joe

golden_eye

Hi JoeY
i am trying to do what u have suggested.
How can i create non-record folder, there is no such option, is only label new folder.
Could u be more specific.Please.
Thanks.

abruzzi

We currently use the old RM module on 3.1 enterprise. The old system had a provision for "Record Folder" which assigned all the record metadata to the folder, and everything inside that record folder was a normal document to alfresco. Most of our records comprise many documents, and are best organized by subfolders. As an example, we have a department that enforces court requirements for DWI offenders. Our setup looks like this:

DWI Case Files (File Plan in the old RM app terminology)

->Smith, Bob 12345 (This is a record folder for case 12345, offender Bob Smith, retention is 6 years after the case is closed)
–>Alcohol Screening (a Folder. The offender must take periodic alcohol tests, the results go in here.)
–>Court Documents (A folder. All judgement and sentencing information)
–>Fee Agreements (a folder. reciepts for fees paid.)
–>Misc (a folder. other stuff)
–>Personal information (a folder. demographic, surveys, personality questionaires, etc.)
–>Program Requirements (a folder. referrals, reports from referral agencies)

This case has no documents in the root of the record folder, but some do. Our legal department case files have the resulting action placed in the root. The DWI case above will frequently generate several new documents every month for 5 years before going into cutoff, so they will easily hold 100-200 individual documents, making the subfolders a near necessity for this.

From my brief look on the community edition, it does look like it still can apply cutoff to record folders, but the inability to add folders within that record folder could be a deal killer to us. Am I missing anything?

Geof

abruzzi

I'm looking at how hard it is to add the capability, maybe others want to jump in, but the ability to add a folder in a records folder returns if you make the following change:

WEB-INF/classes/alfresco/templates/webscripts/org/alfresco/slingshot/documentlibrary/dod5015-evaluator.lib.js

         /**
          * SPECIFIC TO: RECORD FOLDER
          */
         case "record-folder":
            actionSet = "recordFolder";

            permissions["new-folder"] = capabilities["Create"];  <<—Add this line.

            /* Record and Record Folder common evaluator */
            Evaluator.recordAndRecordFolder(asset, permissions, status);

            /* Update Cut Off status to folder-specific status */
            if (status["cutoff"] == true)
            {
               delete status["cutoff"];
               status["cutoff-folder"] = true;
            }


‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

Unfortunately adding folders or files to that folder fails. I'll look for the fix to that after lunch.

Geof

unknown-user

Hi guys,
Is there anyone who managed to get this problem solved?

hkır

Hi,
I want to customize rm in accordance with the electronic records management standard of my country and this standard allows nested records folders. As I far as I understand It has been implemented once (https://issues.alfresco.com/jira/browse/ALFCOM-3484). How can I enable (reimplement) such functionality, where should I start from, what are the key points that I should be aware?

aman

Alfresco developers - this is a really important question (probably for many organisations). We are investigating moving from an existing RM solution/filplan to Alfresco RM. However the source fileplan is already 4 levels deep (i.e. an optional level of sub-folders at the botton tier) and not practically reducible, so we really need that 4th level to be available in Alfresco. I tried the solution posted a couple of posts back, which simply enables the creation of subfolders - however as noted, it is not possible to create anything in those folders - there are resulting Null Ptr errors in the log.

Again - is there a solution to this? Surely enabling organiastions who are ready to make the move to Alfresco to do so by providing what must surely be a trivial accommodation is good for everyone?

cheers,
Aman

croc

Hi Guys,

if you check abruzzi's post on 26 Jan 2010, 22:01, he said he was able to get the folder enabled to create Folders but the problem was adding files and sub-folders to that sub-folder.
Check the code below for that.

WEB-INF/classes/alfresco/templates/webscripts/org/alfresco/slingshot/documentlibrary/dod5015-evaluator.lib.js

         /**
          * SPECIFIC TO: RECORD FOLDER
          */
         case "record-folder":
            actionSet = "recordFolder";

            permissions["new-folder"] = capabilities["Create"];  //<<—Add this line.

            /* Record and Record Folder common evaluator */
            Evaluator.recordAndRecordFolder(asset, permissions, status);

            /* Update Cut Off status to folder-specific status */
            if (status["cutoff"] == true)
            {
               delete status["cutoff"];
               status["cutoff-folder"] = true;
            }
‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

I was able to get files and folders added to that sub-folder. The problem I still have is regarding the matadata to either the files of sub-folders created. They don't use the same metadata as the folder or the file.

Below is what you need to do.

/DOD 5015/source/java/org/alfresco/module/org_alfresco_module_dod5015/action/impl/FileAction.java

 // Calculate the review schedule
        VitalRecordDefinition viDef = this.recordsManagementService.getVitalRecordDefinition(actionedUponNodeRef);
        Date reviewAsOf = viDef.getNextReviewDate();
  if (viDef != null){ //Add this line
        if (reviewAsOf != null)
        {
            Map<QName, Serializable> reviewProps = new HashMap<QName, Serializable>(1);
            reviewProps.put(RecordsManagementModel.PROP_REVIEW_AS_OF, reviewAsOf);
            
            if (!nodeService.hasAspect(actionedUponNodeRef, ASPECT_VITAL_RECORD))
            {
                this.nodeService.addAspect(actionedUponNodeRef, RecordsManagementModel.ASPECT_VITAL_RECORD, reviewProps);
            }
            else
            {
                Map<QName, Serializable> props = nodeService.getProperties(actionedUponNodeRef);
                props.putAll(reviewProps);
                nodeService.setProperties(actionedUponNodeRef, props);
            }
        }
}// Add this line to   close if (viDef != null){‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

Folders and files that are created after the 4th level use the same metadata. and the reason for that is because when you click New Folder or File Button if execute the method below.

/DOD 5015/source/java/org/alfresco/module/org_alfresco_module_dod5015/RecordsManagementServiceImpl.java
 /**
     * Try to file any record created in a record folder
     * 
     * @see org.alfresco.repo.node.NodeServicePolicies.OnCreateChildAssociationPolicy#onCreateChildAssociation(org.alfresco.service.cmr.repository.ChildAssociationRef, boolean)
     */
    public void onFileContent(ChildAssociationRef childAssocRef, boolean bNew)
    {
        // File the document
        rmActionService.executeRecordsManagementAction(childAssocRef.getChildRef(), "file");
    }
‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

and it was supposed to execute the method above only when the File Button was clicked and execute the one below if New Folder was clicked.

/DOD 5015/source/java/org/alfresco/module/org_alfresco_module_dod5015/RecordsManagementServiceImpl.java

 /**
     * Set's up the record folder upon creation
     * 
     * @param childAssocRef
     * @param bNew
     */
    public void onCreateRecordFolder(ChildAssociationRef childAssocRef, boolean bNew)
    {   
        // Setup record folder
        rmActionService.executeRecordsManagementAction(childAssocRef.getChildRef(), "setupRecordFolder");       
    }
‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

I think it should be very easy to debug and check the reason why it is executing onFileContent instead of onCreateRecordFolder.
I didn't have enough time to do it because I have something that I am working on.

I also think it can be created a long way by creating a new button called New Sub-Folder, which will follow the same functionality as New Folder. so you can just search the New Folder and create a New Sub Folder. But this is gonna take long.

If someone manage to get it working please let me know. I mean the metadata (that comes when you click View Metadata) problem.

Thanks

abruzzi

I haven't had an opportunity to follow up of my earlier work, but now that it looks like we are going to push to migrate from the old (unsupported) RM module to the new certified module, we will be spending some time on it. I'll look at croc's code in addition to mine. If/when we figure it all out, I'll try and post something up. I also think its very solvable, but it always a matter of resources.

Geof

wyuan

Hi,

I added multiple categories and it was successful, but I can not add a folder if I want to. How can put an end to the category and add a folder?

Thanks.

sergil

how can you added multiple categories? can you post the code to do this?

thanks in advance

rwetherall

Hi All,

Yes, we recognise this is the next most important feature we need to add to the RM module.

We are in the process of evaluating what is required so watch this space and I'll keep you updated as things progress.

Cheers,
Roy

dk1

Hi,

I added multiple categories and it was successful, but I can not add a folder if I want to. How can put an end to the category and add a folder?

Thanks.

I don't think its possible.

sergil

Hi All,

Yes, we recognise this is the next most important feature we need to add to the RM module.

We are in the process of evaluating what is required so watch this space and I'll keep you updated as things progress.

Cheers,
Roy

thanks… are you working in this new feature?

sergil

There is news about the development of this feature?

dboisvert

Here is the solution we use. Best part is that it doesn't involve any programming.

In the File Plan :
1. Create a new series , example : «A. Gouvernance» (I work in French);
2. In the series «A. Gouvernance», create a category (example : «AA. Historique et constitution»)
2. At the same level (category) create has many sub-categories you will need for that category (example «AA.10 Historique» and «AA.20 Constitution»);
3. Select the two categories («AA.10 Historique» and «AA.20 Constitution») and move them into the category («AA. Historique et constitution» in the example).

You can now create a folder in the third level categories that you created.

We have tested this down to four levels before creating a folder. Works great.

Hope this helps.

Dominic Boisvert, archiviste
HB archivistes, s.e.n.c.
Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada