Unlock a world of possibilities! Login now and discover the exclusive benefits awaiting you.
Hi,
I am working with models in QlikView and I have admin permissions.
But recently I've come across smth new and weird - my colleague, a user of a model, has asked me to make some sheet that he is using on a regular basis visible to his teammates. I go inside the model......and there is no sheet. He sees it and I do not.
The sheet was created by him and I assume it is private.
Question: is there any way for me to actually see those private sheets and to make them public? Or anything he can do to make that happen? I have browsed the internet and only found how to do that in Qlik Sense. Anything for Qlikview?
Would really appreciate your help
What I see:
What he sees (the purple sheet is the sheet):
What I see in "Sheets" tab when I go to Document properties:
It's not public/private but possibly sheets are hidden based on user access. Goto->Settings-> Document Properties->Sheets
Here you would probably be able to see all sheets and they may be are 'hidden' (check in ShowMode column in lower panel). Now you can change these condition (tab->Caption->Show ->Conditional) by clicking the 'Properties' button (at the bottom of lower pane).
Hi! Thank you for the reply, but unfortunately, that's not the solution. I don't even see the sheet there in the list of all sheets. I am going to edit the post and add print screens of what I see
Sheet title could be different for users as well. You should instead check the sheet ID. In fact, I can see one sheet which is hidden, Check it's title expression as well - that could be something playing the trick.
You are right about the name thing, but I've already looked inside the hidden sheet and it is smth else and has nothing to do with my colleague's sheet.Also, according to him, the sheet's ID is SH16. There is no such ID in the Sheet list. The last one is SH15. So I am still stuck.
Before investigating in any technically matters make sure that you and your colleague are really talking about the same application - maybe there are several versions of it available ... Also take a look if not the sheet-ID itself is an expression which displays different results depending on the user or similar things ...
I never did it myself and therefore I'm not sure how the effects in QlikView are in regard to control the visibility through section access and if it's possible to create a sheet as a server-object (AFAIK it's not possible with the AJAX client but with the IE plugin or the desktop client it may possible).
If it is a server-object you should see the sheet within the qmc and/or within the shared-file. If there is any section access applied take a look on it and if there is any sheet-control just add you and or the wished users or maybe remove it completely and apply the visibility within the sheet-properties maybe based on osuser().
If all suggestions don't help I would further try to export the document-layout and also taking a look if there is any prj-folder available and then looking if the sheet could be found there. Even easier than this may just to open the qvw with an editor like notepad++ and to look for the sheet within the xml meta-data.
- Marcus
Marcus is spot on with this one, you can add a new sheet object with the Ajax client, so I suspect the answer to the puzzle is the user did create the sheet via the Server-side, which you will then NOT see via Desktop client, as that sheet is only visible when open the app via Server, it is not stored to the QVW file, it is stored to the .shared/.tshared file on the Server side. That should explain the behavior, and the user can simply share out the server object via the properties of the object on his view, or you could recreate the object in the QVW file and make it a document object for them.
The one thing I just realized though is Marcus is correct about Sheet in regard to sharing, you cannot share the sheet, only the objects on the sheet... Hopefully this clears things up, if so, be sure to use the Accept as Solution button on Marcus' post, as it is correct.
Regards,
Brett