Make all Out-of-Box property values, including stereotypes, modifiable or extensible.

[#1]

I know you guys have heard this a million time, but throwing my hat in the ring.  In fact, I know that there is an MRD out there addressing this, but this is something that also went around internally.

----------------------------------

Nothing is more frustrating, annoying, maddening (fill in the blank) than trying to use an out of the box property or stereotype
and come to find out that the value that I really want is not available.  Creating a redundant custom property to cover the values a client wants is ... again, fill in the blank. 

I would prefer to see all values for all properties changeable to meet a client's needs.  Some ideas are: 1) Expose those values through the Customization window.  Or 2) Make them all custom properties.  The 'how' isn't critical to me.  I would just prefer some flexibility.  Especially if I want to make a Stereotype value selectable from the list.

[#2]

I like it.

I have asked for control over stereotypes specifically in an idea as we want to define our own in many case; see  JIms Stereotype suggestion.  Michael from MetaStorm (Open Text now I guess) has also raised a similar idea; see Michaels steerotype idea

The worst thing we having out of the box properties that don't have the appropiate values is we may end up with a similar custom property that does contasin the values we require.  This can do some users heads in.

Also let us turn off properties we don't want like the eBusiness field on the system object - it is confusing when users see a lot of unpolulated fields as it gives the impression the object hasn't been completely modeled when in fact we don't want those fileds populates.

JIm

[#3]

Have been pushing this for years....basic application design functionality as far as I am concerned. The user has the right to populate a pull down list with what ever thay want...agree to give them a starting set of values but they can add and delete entries based on their needs.

Fully agree on turning off properties...but whilst we are at it can we have properties that can be linked to an object instance classification. That is we can have an equipment object instance can can be classified as a server or a router or a flow meter that have a set of propoerties linked to them rather that have to create custom objects so we can get the right properties into them. Custom objects and links have there own set of issues.

Cheers

John

[#4]

Hi John and C. Andrew

So we have multiple "ideas" that are all basically asking for similar things and yet the ideas all stay as "New Idea", no one follows up or askes questions. Certainly we see no improvement in the product addressing these user generate ideas. 

5 or 6 ideas from here have been "accepted" by development.  One is even in "Development".  It was in development before 6.3 was released, and it's not made it into 6.3SR1.  I've spent a lot of time in here on occasion going through the ideas, adding comments, adding links between similar ideas, trying to get some coherence across ideas.  I've almost given up as there is no evidence at all that this is an effective forum (which I've said before). 

Given memebers of the ProVision product advisory board were asking for similar things back in 2009/10, and they also have not managed to influence ProVision development I guess we can all take chill pills and do something more productive with our time, like have a cup of coffee.