or( and( rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{8435c94d-c75d-4250-b60c-267fa8e9fe8c}locked']=false, a!isNullOrEmpty(rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{6586c1e5-e5c7-4f5b-8a42-04f5c067aab3}utenteLocked']), a!isUserMemberOfGroup(username: loggedInUser(),groups: cons!SLC_GRP_VERIFICATORE_INFRATEL), contains(cons!SLC_INTS_ID_FASI_PROGETTO_DI_CONNESSIONE[3],rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{12f3ca11-6e56-437c-a111-0188f3e80076}idFase']) ) ), or( and( rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{8435c94d-c75d-4250-b60c-267fa8e9fe8c}locked']=false, a!isNullOrEmpty(rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{6586c1e5-e5c7-4f5b-8a42-04f5c067aab3}utenteLocked']), a!isUserMemberOfGroup(username: loggedInUser(),groups: cons!SLC_GRP_RUP_INFRATEL), contains(cons!SLC_INTS_ID_FASI_PROGETTO_DI_CONNESSIONE[4],rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{12f3ca11-6e56-437c-a111-0188f3e80076}idFase']) ) ), or( and( a!isUserMemberOfGroup(username: loggedInUser(),groups: cons!SLC_GRP_PMS_INFRATEL), contains(cons!SLC_INTS_ID_FASI_PROGETTO_DI_CONNESSIONE[3],rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{12f3ca11-6e56-437c-a111-0188f3e80076}idFase']), contains(cons!SLC_INTS_ID_FASI_PROGETTO_DI_CONNESSIONE[4],rv!record['recordType!{6456804e-1013-4209-bb05-6edb57f49898}SLC Progetto Di Connessione.fields.{12f3ca11-6e56-437c-a111-0188f3e80076}idFase']) ) )
im using this code to display button for this 3 groups of users but its only appears only on the first expression groups which is:SLC_GRP_VERIFICATORE_INFRATEL,
is the logical expression of OR / AND is written bad?
Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible
Not sure what that logic should express. That or() only wraps a single condition, the and(). In the and, you define many conditions. Which is OK, but hard to validate. Especially without knowing any details.
I suggest to first implement a more simplified version, and then add more complexity once that works.