1

Can't find anything on this from my searches, so thought I'd put the question here: If I use fields from a multiple-record custom field set in a Drupal webform via the webform_civicrm integration module (let's say I want to record a list of qualifications, for example), then I can expose up to 9 instances of those fields in the webform.

If the same user comes back some time later, as a logged in user, and fills a new instance of the webform, will these fields be pre-filled with any existing data held for the user, or will blank fields be presented to enable them to add further records?

I can see sensible use cases for both options, but in my current use case I want to ensure that the user is provided with a clean form to enable them to add new records rather than edit/overwrite existing records. Is this possible, and if so how?

| improve this question | |
  • Starting to experiment with this right now Graham. – pmoz Oct 19 '15 at 22:43
  • From what I understand if existing data will be edited/updated unless there are sufficient instances of the fields in the webforms to provide for an empty set of fields, in which case a new record can be created. Logical, but not ideal, and in some cases I can see that this would be unworkable. – Graham Jan 6 '16 at 14:07
  • 1
    We ran into that as well. In one of our cases, I was trying to use it for medications and would hit the webform limit of 9 or 10 (can't remember off the top of my head). I am currently getting away from using multiple record custom field sets because of the inability to target specific records. – pmoz Jan 8 '16 at 13:11
  • Any progress on this? I ran into the problem that webform could happily create a new occurrence of the custom record if none existed before, but I couldn't find how to make it create a new record when there is an existing record - which is what I wanted. Any ideas how to do that? – Andy Clark Feb 19 '16 at 20:25
  • I worked around this for the reason given by Paul Mosey. Might be worth posting an issue on the webform_civicrm module page, or adding to this one: drupal.org/node/2242287, but it looks like Coleman is not about to jump on it. – Graham Feb 21 '16 at 11:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.