Apex Code Development You need to sign in to do that
Don't have an account?
Raman-OH Sample Recruiting Apps - Ques on Sharing Rule( Force.com Platform Fundamentals.pdf Page 173)
Statement -
The sharing rule for the Employment Website object is necessary to let hiring managers postjobs, even though they will never be updating employment website records directly (the org-widedefaults will prevent that).
Ques - Isnt Sharing rule supposed to override the Org Wide default . If so , why doesnt the Hiring Manager get the write permission on Employment Wesite when we are creating a sharing rule for giving it Read/Write on Employment Website
Firstly, you probably shouldn't describe "sharing rules" as "overriding." This implies that you could, for example, make a "read-only" sharing rule that would prevent "read-write" access on an object with the organization wide default (OWD) of "Public Read/Write". Sharing is cumulative, with the most permissive permissions determining the overall permissions for a user's access to a record.
That aside, the rule grants Reviewers (defined as the Recruiting Managers and SW Dev Manager) read/write permission to Employment Website records for any Employment Website owned by a Recruiting Manager. The hiring managers are granted read/write access to the Employment Website records. They must have this access in order to post Job Listings. The text states that they won't ever be editing those records, not because of a limitation in salesforce.com's sharing, but simply that they do not need to.
Without this restriction in place, it would then be possible for any user at all to be able to add Job Listings to an Employment Website, which shouldn't be true, because only the hiring managers can post job listings to the site. This simple mechanism prevents abuse of the system, although it does technically grant the hiring managers too much power as a tradeoff for locking out all other users from posting Job Listings.
Thanks a lot for the prompt response .
Used the word override bec the text on sharing rule says -Use sharing rules makes automatic exceptions to our organization-wide sharing settings for defined sets of users
When a read/wrirte access via sharing rule is given to the group reviewers , the user belonging to SW Dev Manager is able to edit the Job application record (Edit Button Appears)
BUT
When We created a sharing rule for granting the reviewers group Read/Write Access on Employment Website , wondering why is the SW Dev Manager not able to edit the Employment Website record (Edit Button doesnt appear)
Thx
Will appreicate if somone can share thoughts on the ques posed in message-
When a read/wrirte access via sharing rule is given to the group reviewers , the user belonging to SW Dev Manager is able to edit the Job application record (Edit Button Appears)
BUT
When We created a sharing rule for granting the reviewers group Read/Write Access on Employment Website , why is the SW Dev Manager not able to edit the Employment Website record (Edit Button doesnt appear)
Visted the board after a few weeks and came across the thread I started .
I think the Manual has a minor error which caused the confusion . Its NOT the Org wide defaults which are preventing the Hiring Managers from updating the Employment website after a sharing rule gives them the access to read/write . Its the object level access which is preventing it .
So instead of
The sharing rule for the Employment Website object is necessary to let hiring managers postjobs, even though they will never be updating employment website records directly (the org-widedefaults will prevent that) on page 173
the Manual shd say
The sharing rule for the Employment Website object is necessary to let hiring managers postjobs, even though they will never be updating employment website records directly (the Object Level access for the Hiring Manager profile will prevent that).
Thoughts ??