how to reproduce:
you have a vocabulary A + term reference field "my_field_a_b" referencing vocabulary B
create a rule component which reacts on a term of vocabulary A.
the field "my_field_a_b" is not available using the data selectors.
using the condition Entity has field "my_field_a_b" beforehand doesn't help, nor does Data comparison for [my_term-term:vocabulary..., Data value: vocabulary A
the same scenario seems to work for nodes
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #10 | rules_terms_test.patch | 4.36 KB | fago |
| #8 | rules_terms_test.patch | 2.42 KB | fago |
| #5 | rules_term_reference_test.patch | 2.71 KB | dasjo |
| #3 | rules_term_reference.patch | 2.77 KB | dasjo |
Comments
Comment #1
floretan commentedI can confirm the same issue. However, I'm not sure whether this is an issue with Rules or with the Entity Metadata API.
Comment #2
fagoindeed, it was a metadata issue. I improved it to incorporate the bundle for the referenced terms. To test update to the latest entity API - please reopen if there are any remaining problems.
Comment #3
dasjothe issue described above seems not to be fixed by fago's last commit.
attaching a patch which adds a rules test for the described use case.
Comment #5
dasjooops, git patch wrongly generated. hope this one works :)
Comment #6
fagoComment #8
fagothanks, the tests is incorrect though. (uses vocab, wrong condition entity_is_new).
I fixed the test -> attached. Patch still fails, thus verifies the problems.
Comment #10
fagook, there were some more problems in the test I noted during fixing it -> also the field type was wrong + the actual assertion() did not work either. Anyway, attached patch should fix the problem + the tests.
The actual problem was that RulesState::addMetadataAssertions() has not follow a recent entity metadata API change yet, causing the problem for properties containing dashes/underscores.
Comment #11
fagoall green now.. :) -> committed.