force:hasRecordId cascade?

up vote
2
down vote

favorite

I am looking for verification/documentation on force:hasRecordId. It appears from my experience that recordId is only provided to the "container" component, and it does not feed down to any child components without explicitly passing the value.

Is that right?

BTW, I've read the docs here. They don't address my question.

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

Can you clarify with a snippet what you think it needs vs what you hope it does?
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 18:38

@SebastianKessel, I have a component that is the 3rd great-grandchild (3gg.cmp) of my container component. I need 3gg.cmp to be aware of the recordId of the page it's on. Using force:hasRecordId doesn't work in this context. Instead, I have to put force:hasRecordId in the outermost component, and cascade the recordId value to each child component all the way down to 3gg.cmp. (I'm going to be explaining this to a group soon, and I wanted complete clarity so I'm not spewing BS.)
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:11

add a comment |

up vote
2
down vote

favorite

Is that right?

BTW, I've read the docs here. They don't address my question.

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

Can you clarify with a snippet what you think it needs vs what you hope it does?
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 18:38

@SebastianKessel, I have a component that is the 3rd great-grandchild (3gg.cmp) of my container component. I need 3gg.cmp to be aware of the recordId of the page it's on. Using force:hasRecordId doesn't work in this context. Instead, I have to put force:hasRecordId in the outermost component, and cascade the recordId value to each child component all the way down to 3gg.cmp. (I'm going to be explaining this to a group soon, and I wanted complete clarity so I'm not spewing BS.)
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:11

add a comment |

up vote
2
down vote

favorite

Is that right?

BTW, I've read the docs here. They don't address my question.

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

Is that right?

BTW, I've read the docs here. They don't address my question.

lightning-aura-components

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

asked Dec 4 at 18:36

PatMcClellan__c

671217

Can you clarify with a snippet what you think it needs vs what you hope it does?
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 18:38

@SebastianKessel, I have a component that is the 3rd great-grandchild (3gg.cmp) of my container component. I need 3gg.cmp to be aware of the recordId of the page it's on. Using force:hasRecordId doesn't work in this context. Instead, I have to put force:hasRecordId in the outermost component, and cascade the recordId value to each child component all the way down to 3gg.cmp. (I'm going to be explaining this to a group soon, and I wanted complete clarity so I'm not spewing BS.)
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:11

add a comment |

Can you clarify with a snippet what you think it needs vs what you hope it does?
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 18:38

@SebastianKessel, I have a component that is the 3rd great-grandchild (3gg.cmp) of my container component. I need 3gg.cmp to be aware of the recordId of the page it's on. Using force:hasRecordId doesn't work in this context. Instead, I have to put force:hasRecordId in the outermost component, and cascade the recordId value to each child component all the way down to 3gg.cmp. (I'm going to be explaining this to a group soon, and I wanted complete clarity so I'm not spewing BS.)
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:11

Can you clarify with a snippet what you think it needs vs what you hope it does?
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 18:38

@SebastianKessel, I have a component that is the 3rd great-grandchild (3gg.cmp) of my container component. I need 3gg.cmp to be aware of the recordId of the page it's on. Using force:hasRecordId doesn't work in this context. Instead, I have to put force:hasRecordId in the outermost component, and cascade the recordId value to each child component all the way down to 3gg.cmp. (I'm going to be explaining this to a group soon, and I wanted complete clarity so I'm not spewing BS.)
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:11

add a comment |

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
6
down vote

accepted

I think the documentation covers it, but it's not very explicit and relies on us to read into a couple of key words that aren't obviously key words.

A marker interface is a signal to the component’s container to add the interface’s behavior to the component

Emphasis mine. Later,

Important The recordId attribute is set only when you place or invoke the component in an explicit record context. For example, when you place the component directly on a record page layout, or invoke it as an object-specific action from a record page or object home.

Emphasis again mine.

So if we have Components A and B, here:

`componentA.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB />

</aura:component>

`componentB.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    {! v.recordId }

</aura:component>

You get no output if you place this on a record page. (I did validate this directly).

But if componentA, which is componentB's container, supplies the record Id:

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB recordId="{! v.recordId }" />

</aura:component>

You will indeed observe the output.

Only componentA is in an "explicit record context", which the documentation implicitly defines for us as a record page container or use as an object-specific action.

componentB is not in an explicit record context (it could be anywhere) and requires its container, componentA, to provide the recordId.

edited Dec 4 at 19:47

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

Another wonderful answer, David. I wish I had grokked what the OP needed with as little input as you did
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 23:29

@David Reed, thanks for the clarity. So there's really no point in adding force:hasRecordId to child components, as you have to explicitly pass the recordId from the parent anyway. And in that context, recordId isn't a magic word, it's just an attribute name. Correct?
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:07

@PatMcClellan__c I agree in the sense that it is not magic. I could see adding the interface to a reusable component that might be used both within some custom container (which would explicitly supply the record Id) or be placed directly on a record page. At worst, it does no harm; I think it's case-specific whether you'd want to use it.
– David Reed
Dec 5 at 19:12

@DavidReed, good point on reusability. Thanks again for your clarity on this.
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:14

add a comment |

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "459"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});

}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f241412%2fforcehasrecordid-cascade%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
6
down vote

accepted

I think the documentation covers it, but it's not very explicit and relies on us to read into a couple of key words that aren't obviously key words.

A marker interface is a signal to the component’s container to add the interface’s behavior to the component

Emphasis mine. Later,

Important The recordId attribute is set only when you place or invoke the component in an explicit record context. For example, when you place the component directly on a record page layout, or invoke it as an object-specific action from a record page or object home.

Emphasis again mine.

So if we have Components A and B, here:

`componentA.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB />

</aura:component>

`componentB.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    {! v.recordId }

</aura:component>

You get no output if you place this on a record page. (I did validate this directly).

But if componentA, which is componentB's container, supplies the record Id:

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB recordId="{! v.recordId }" />

</aura:component>

You will indeed observe the output.

Only componentA is in an "explicit record context", which the documentation implicitly defines for us as a record page container or use as an object-specific action.

componentB is not in an explicit record context (it could be anywhere) and requires its container, componentA, to provide the recordId.

edited Dec 4 at 19:47

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

Another wonderful answer, David. I wish I had grokked what the OP needed with as little input as you did
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 23:29

@David Reed, thanks for the clarity. So there's really no point in adding force:hasRecordId to child components, as you have to explicitly pass the recordId from the parent anyway. And in that context, recordId isn't a magic word, it's just an attribute name. Correct?
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:07

@PatMcClellan__c I agree in the sense that it is not magic. I could see adding the interface to a reusable component that might be used both within some custom container (which would explicitly supply the record Id) or be placed directly on a record page. At worst, it does no harm; I think it's case-specific whether you'd want to use it.
– David Reed
Dec 5 at 19:12

@DavidReed, good point on reusability. Thanks again for your clarity on this.
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:14

add a comment |

up vote
6
down vote

accepted

I think the documentation covers it, but it's not very explicit and relies on us to read into a couple of key words that aren't obviously key words.

A marker interface is a signal to the component’s container to add the interface’s behavior to the component

Emphasis mine. Later,

Important The recordId attribute is set only when you place or invoke the component in an explicit record context. For example, when you place the component directly on a record page layout, or invoke it as an object-specific action from a record page or object home.

Emphasis again mine.

So if we have Components A and B, here:

`componentA.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB />

</aura:component>

`componentB.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    {! v.recordId }

</aura:component>

You get no output if you place this on a record page. (I did validate this directly).

But if componentA, which is componentB's container, supplies the record Id:

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB recordId="{! v.recordId }" />

</aura:component>

You will indeed observe the output.

Only componentA is in an "explicit record context", which the documentation implicitly defines for us as a record page container or use as an object-specific action.

componentB is not in an explicit record context (it could be anywhere) and requires its container, componentA, to provide the recordId.

edited Dec 4 at 19:47

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

Another wonderful answer, David. I wish I had grokked what the OP needed with as little input as you did
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 23:29

@David Reed, thanks for the clarity. So there's really no point in adding force:hasRecordId to child components, as you have to explicitly pass the recordId from the parent anyway. And in that context, recordId isn't a magic word, it's just an attribute name. Correct?
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:07

@PatMcClellan__c I agree in the sense that it is not magic. I could see adding the interface to a reusable component that might be used both within some custom container (which would explicitly supply the record Id) or be placed directly on a record page. At worst, it does no harm; I think it's case-specific whether you'd want to use it.
– David Reed
Dec 5 at 19:12

@DavidReed, good point on reusability. Thanks again for your clarity on this.
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:14

add a comment |

up vote
6
down vote

accepted

I think the documentation covers it, but it's not very explicit and relies on us to read into a couple of key words that aren't obviously key words.

A marker interface is a signal to the component’s container to add the interface’s behavior to the component

Emphasis mine. Later,

Important The recordId attribute is set only when you place or invoke the component in an explicit record context. For example, when you place the component directly on a record page layout, or invoke it as an object-specific action from a record page or object home.

Emphasis again mine.

So if we have Components A and B, here:

`componentA.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB />

</aura:component>

`componentB.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    {! v.recordId }

</aura:component>

You get no output if you place this on a record page. (I did validate this directly).

But if componentA, which is componentB's container, supplies the record Id:

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB recordId="{! v.recordId }" />

</aura:component>

You will indeed observe the output.

Only componentA is in an "explicit record context", which the documentation implicitly defines for us as a record page container or use as an object-specific action.

componentB is not in an explicit record context (it could be anywhere) and requires its container, componentA, to provide the recordId.

edited Dec 4 at 19:47

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

I think the documentation covers it, but it's not very explicit and relies on us to read into a couple of key words that aren't obviously key words.

A marker interface is a signal to the component’s container to add the interface’s behavior to the component

Emphasis mine. Later,

Important The recordId attribute is set only when you place or invoke the component in an explicit record context. For example, when you place the component directly on a record page layout, or invoke it as an object-specific action from a record page or object home.

Emphasis again mine.

So if we have Components A and B, here:

`componentA.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB />

</aura:component>

`componentB.cmp`

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    {! v.recordId }

</aura:component>

You get no output if you place this on a record page. (I did validate this directly).

But if componentA, which is componentB's container, supplies the record Id:

<aura:component implements="flexipage:availableForRecordHome,force:hasRecordId" access="global" >

    <c:componentB recordId="{! v.recordId }" />

</aura:component>

You will indeed observe the output.

Only componentA is in an "explicit record context", which the documentation implicitly defines for us as a record page container or use as an object-specific action.

componentB is not in an explicit record context (it could be anywhere) and requires its container, componentA, to provide the recordId.

edited Dec 4 at 19:47

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

edited Dec 4 at 19:47

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

answered Dec 4 at 19:00

David Reed

28.5k61746

Another wonderful answer, David. I wish I had grokked what the OP needed with as little input as you did
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 23:29

@David Reed, thanks for the clarity. So there's really no point in adding force:hasRecordId to child components, as you have to explicitly pass the recordId from the parent anyway. And in that context, recordId isn't a magic word, it's just an attribute name. Correct?
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:07

@PatMcClellan__c I agree in the sense that it is not magic. I could see adding the interface to a reusable component that might be used both within some custom container (which would explicitly supply the record Id) or be placed directly on a record page. At worst, it does no harm; I think it's case-specific whether you'd want to use it.
– David Reed
Dec 5 at 19:12

@DavidReed, good point on reusability. Thanks again for your clarity on this.
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:14

add a comment |

Another wonderful answer, David. I wish I had grokked what the OP needed with as little input as you did
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 23:29

@David Reed, thanks for the clarity. So there's really no point in adding force:hasRecordId to child components, as you have to explicitly pass the recordId from the parent anyway. And in that context, recordId isn't a magic word, it's just an attribute name. Correct?
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:07

@PatMcClellan__c I agree in the sense that it is not magic. I could see adding the interface to a reusable component that might be used both within some custom container (which would explicitly supply the record Id) or be placed directly on a record page. At worst, it does no harm; I think it's case-specific whether you'd want to use it.
– David Reed
Dec 5 at 19:12

@DavidReed, good point on reusability. Thanks again for your clarity on this.
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:14

Another wonderful answer, David. I wish I had grokked what the OP needed with as little input as you did
– Sebastian Kessel
Dec 4 at 23:29

@David Reed, thanks for the clarity. So there's really no point in adding force:hasRecordId to child components, as you have to explicitly pass the recordId from the parent anyway. And in that context, recordId isn't a magic word, it's just an attribute name. Correct?
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:07

@PatMcClellan__c I agree in the sense that it is not magic. I could see adding the interface to a reusable component that might be used both within some custom container (which would explicitly supply the record Id) or be placed directly on a record page. At worst, it does no harm; I think it's case-specific whether you'd want to use it.
– David Reed
Dec 5 at 19:12

@DavidReed, good point on reusability. Thanks again for your clarity on this.
– PatMcClellan__c
Dec 5 at 19:14

add a comment |

draft saved

draft discarded

Thanks for contributing an answer to Salesforce Stack Exchange!

Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …

Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.

Please pay close attention to the following guidance:

Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …

Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Bdtyktl