Showing relation types in displays (editor summaries) completely buggy?

[Providence 1.7.11]

In our database, entities can have relations e.g. to places, objects and to other entities. In the "Summary" tab of the entity editor we would like to display all these relations along with the respective relation type. But the display of the relation types is extremely erroneous -- sometimes it is correct, sometimes it is wrong (showing a completely different relation type). However, in the editor itself it is always displayed correctly, only in the "Summary" displays we constantly find errors.

We have tried several variants when configuring the display, but can't solve the problem:

  • Relations to places don't need any display code since they are displayed automatically as linked place names with the relation type in brackets (which is nevertheless often wrong).
  • relations to other entities need a configured display code since they aren't displayed automatically in the correct way. Therefore, we have tried some display code variants, e.g.:
<l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)

But this always resulted in often wrong relation type displays.

Some weeks ago I already asked here how to show asymmetric relations between entities (e.g. father - son) correctly in displays, since there is always one of the both sides shown wrong:

Displays (Providence): relation direction between 2 entities of the same type not shown correctly

I didn't get an answer in that thread. But now, as we can see that the problem is far bigger then only concerning asymmetric relations, we really need a solution! Our complete CA is configured to show the summaries as first view when clicking on links to datasets, for the reason that all data is clearly arranged and information retrieval is easy. Is our display code wrong, or is CA here extremely buggy?


  • P.S.: The problem is not only with entities, but as far as we can see with all types of records.

  • We have tried dozens of display code variants, among others:

    <l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)
    <l>^ca_entities.related.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)
    <unit><l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)</unit>
    <unit relativeTo="ca_entities"><l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)</unit>
    <unit relativeTo="ca_entities_x_entities"><l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)</unit>
    <unit><l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> <unit relativeTo="ca_entities_x_entities">(^relationship_typename)</unit></unit>
    <unit relativeTo="ca_entities"><l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> <unit relativeTo="ca_entities_x_entities">(^relationship_typename)</unit></unit>

    Some of them don't work at all, sometimes the displayed relation types change, but never all of them are displayed correctly.

  • edited July 2021

    There is a new release, 1.7.12 that should resolve these issues.


  • That's great, thanks - we'll try it out soon!

    But which of the above code variants is the right one to display related entities in the editor summary of an entity record?

  • <l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename) will work

  • Thanks. So is it only necessary to add the modifier .related if we want to pull other data from a related record (= other than the display name)? The user manual says:

    To pull data from related records of the same kind as the primary (Ex. objects related to an object) add “related” to the bundle specifier:


  • "related" is only required when the related item is in the same table as the primary. You can put it on any related spec if you want, but it's implied in cases where the table of the spec is different than the primary.

  • edited August 2021

    Even under version 1.7.12, unfortunately, the correct display of the relation direction for relations between entity and entity still does not work. At least I could not find the correct display formula for this. What I would like to have:

    Person A (is child of) <--> Person B (is parent of)

    Displayed though:

    Person A (is child of) <--> Person B (is child of)

    I tried the following formulas -- none of them worked (the first is what you suggested):

    <l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)
    <l>^ca_entities.related.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)
    <unit relativeTo="ca_entities.related"><l>^ca_entities.preferred_labels</l> (^relationship_typename)</unit>

    There must be a solution, because in the entity editor CA shows the relation direction correctly!?

  • Still no solution to this issue?

    We updated to Providence 1.7.13, but this didn't help.

  • We're still desperately looking for a solution to this ... You said here that for Pawtucket there was an update with a fix for this problem, but does it still persist in Providence? Or are we just using the wrong formulas/code (see tested examples above)?

  • edited June 4

    You can use this:

    <l>^ca_entities.related.preferred_labels.displayname</l> (^relationship_typename)

    I have just tried this in both 1.8 and 1.7.14 and it displays relationship type for me on entity-entity relationships, but it does not always respect directionality, which is the long standing problem you've reported. I've just pushed a fix for this in both 1.7 master. It was already fixed in 1.8. You can pull this from git now. I'll roll up a 1.7.15 release in the coming week.

Sign In or Register to comment.