Correctly handle root nodes for the dcaPicker

[agoat]

The handling of the rootNodes in the new dcaPicker is not working right for non admin backend users.
If the backend user is restricted to a page mounts and also a rootNode from a different level is defined as attribute for the picker, no pages will be shown at all.

Little example:

Let's say we have the following page structure

If the user is restricted to ID 5 and a rootNode ID 1 is set as an attribute for the picker no pages will be shown. That's because the ID 1 is not a child of ID 5.
The same happens when the attribute rootNode for the picker is also ID 5. Because the rootNode itself is not included for the array intersection.

So first the given rootNode(s) have to be added for the intersection. And secondly all the children have to be traversed down for the the rootNode attribute, too.

[aschempp]

Interesting.

Why do we use $GLOBALS['TL_DCA'][$this->strTable]['list']['sorting']['root'] instead of $this->root in the first place??

[agoat]

Why do we use $GLOBALS['TL_DCA'][$this->strTable]['list']['sorting']['root'] instead of $this->root in the first place??

Not sure what you want to know exactly.

But it looks like that in $this->root the current user page mount is already stored and we don't need to take it again from $GLOBALS['TL_DCA'][$this->strTable]['list']['sorting']['root'].

However, the basic problem remains. If the user page mount is on a childpage and the roodNode attribute is set to the parent page, no pages will be shown. We have to use getChildRecords on both - rootNodes and $this->root.

[leofeyer]

How exactly can I reproduce this?

[agoat]

How exactly can I reproduce this?

Let's say we have the following page structure:

Create a user and set the pagemount to 'subfolder'.
Now change (for testing purpose) the url field in the tl_content.php to the following:

		'url' => array
		(
			'label'                   => &$GLOBALS['TL_LANG']['MSC']['url'],
			'exclude'                 => true,
			'search'                  => true,
			'inputType'               => 'text',
			'eval'                    => array
                        (
				'mandatory'		=> true, 
				'rgxp'			=> 'url', 
				'decodeEntities'	=> true, 
				'maxlength'		=> 255, 
				'dcaPicker'		=> true,
				'fieldType'		=> 'radio', 
				'filesOnly'		=> true, 
				'rootNodes'		=> array(ID of 'test root' or 'subfolder')
				'tl_class'		=>'w50 wizard'
			),
			'sql'                     => "varchar(255) NOT NULL default ''"
		),

If you now try to select a page in the hyperlink ce, no pages will be shown.

[leofeyer]

Ok, these are actually two cases:

Page mount ID5 + root nodes ID5

This is clearly a bug, which I have fixed in c0ca437.

Page mount ID5 + root nodes ID1

This does not seem like a bug to me, because if a user is not allowed to see anything above ID5 and the admin configures ID1, there is no intersection – not even if some of the user's page mounts actually match some subpages. But we can sure discuss this case with the other @contao/developers.

[agoat]

As an example: I have an extension which restrict the selection to the current page root (think about multi domain or multi language setups).

So I will pass the root nodes ID1 and the user can select what is the result of the intersection of all child pages. Otherwise I first need to get the page mount of the user to do it myself but afterwards the half check is done again.

IMO it makes totally sence to support root node IDs above or outside of the page mount children range.

[leofeyer]

As discussed in Mumble on September 7th, we want to support your use case. However, we are not sure about the array_merge() solution. Did you test this with multiple root nodes (e.g. $arrRoot = array(1, 5)?

[agoat]

I tested this with multiple root nodes from root pages by setting the ids of all multilingual root pages. No problems here.

But when I set (why ever) a root and a child page id, like your example $arrRoot = array(1, 5), it returned the resulting root page(s) multiple times. So we have to be sure to return only unique values.

Fixed in 409e08c.

[leofeyer]

Why did you add the SORT_NUMERIC flag?

[agoat]

Why did you add the SORT_NUMERIC flag?

To compare the array values numerically.

But your solution in f3aafc0 works, too.

[leofeyer]

Fixed in f3aafc0.