7

You can enable/disable the feature from RTF field click here, but I dont think we can do this for specific user group(s) definitely something not out of the box.


5

Is there some way to also define defaults for these additional rights which come from optional modules so we don't have to keep doing this? Not that I know of. It seems like we always have to manually add this right to the required groups for each new publication, which is is bit of a pain. You could utilize the Event System system to set these right. ...


5

You should not give these user groups Workflow Management Rights. Also, make sure that these groups are independent (they all may be members of Authors group, for example).


4

AFAIK - OOTB No, you could write an event system to check the specific schema metadata fields change while OnComponentSave event to Prevent Unauthorised Users Updating. Update: There are no specific API to check specific field value changed or not?, but you could detect if there are any changes in metadata XML content using args.DetectedChanges. if (!...


4

It is non-exportable properties, see: docs


2

The one obvious way would be to remove the publishing permission however doing that will also remove the permission to publish. As per your description, it seems, you just want to remove permission to remove from publishing queue however not block the publishing for the users of that group. In such a scenario, you can develop a GUI extension which will ...


2

I noticed the current behavior and was surprised enough to post about it. But I didn't realize any changes and just assumed I was mistaken before that you could add members from within a group. I'm actually seeing the same behavior from 2013 SP1 and 2011 SP1, so any changes aren't specific to 2013. Are your differences for 2011 GA and earlier? So for 2011 ...


2

Last I tried, you could try to remove read permissions on certain embedded Schema and the UI would render just the fields the user can access. However, this has issues with mandatory fields and to me, it seems like more of a hack than a proper product feature. There are probably a few ways to simplify or otherwise address the requirement. Specifically, it ...


2

With regards to your comments on simply not allowing the change on the field, there used to be an extension to make fields read-only. See Is it possible to set permissions on schema fields to restrict editing of them to certain users? Also, there's an IDEA on this too: https://community.sdl.com/ideas/sdl-tridion-dx-ideas/i/sdl-tridion-sites-ideas/read-only-...


1

In the past, (where the client had a tool to create new publications with specific blueprint setups depending on selected options) we added a simple extension to select 'default' permissions (that would ideally have been inherited) and then options to override them (if you were a member of a specific user group) - all interacting through the Core Service ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible