Adobe Community: Message List - Bug List thread

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 12 Nov 2014 20:52:35 GMT

This will probably been when I went two levels down and tired to pass when inside another collection.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 12 Nov 2014 16:01:55 GMT

Scott Shefler wrote:

{module_webappscount id="Properties" filter="classified" itemId="/Properties/States/Texas" collection="collectionName" template=""} DOES NOT WORK

{module_webappscount id="Properties" filter="classified" itemId="123456" collection="collectionName" template=""} DOES WORK

I know you can just do this {module_webapps id="Properties" filter="classified" itemId="/Properties/States/Texas" collection="collectionName" template=""} {{collectionName.items | size}} or {{collectionName.items.size}}

But again the documentation is inaccurate and indicates the above should work So should add the ability to put named categories for {module_webappscount} or on the documentation should indicate that you can only use ID for classified as and or give the preferred method of getting a web app count which now might be just outputting the {module_webapps} and do either {{collectionName.items | size}} or {{collectionName.items.size}}.

Hey Scott.

This is indeed a bug. itemId parameter should accept either the category Id or the qualified category name. We've logged it and fixed it, should catch the next release.

Thanks for the bug report!

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:29:43 GMT

Hey Scott.

Scott Shefler wrote:

Doesn't look like you can currently pass the data source Id into a module web app tag through a collection. When I inserted the same module tag but hard coded the ID in then it works and If I try to just output the data source id outside of the module tag it works but not within the module tag. See below:

{module_webapps id="Properties" filter="all" hideEmptyMessage="true" collection="map" template=""}

{% for item in map.items %}

{{item.['Property Type_id']}} DOES WORK

{module_webapps,25542,i,{{item.['Property Type_id']}},,,,,true template="/ModuleTemplates/WebApps/PropertiesTypes/name.tpl"} DOES NOT WORK

{module_webapps,25542,i,7439185,,,,,true template="/ModuleTemplates/WebApps/PropertiesTypes/name.tpl"} DOES WORK

{% endfor %}

Also, I second what Liam said about having an option not to choose a selection from the data source in the web app. I have brought this up several months ago as what would seem like an easy update that is very crucial.

This is a limitation of the engine. If you want to pass liquid parameters to a module, you have to use named parameters, otherwise this will not work (outputting liquid data in modules using old module syntax - with coma will not work).

{module_webapps id="25542" filter="item" itemid="{{item.['Property Type_id']}}" ....} whould work just fine.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 16:20:04 GMT

Doesn't look like you can currently pass the data source Id into a module web app tag through a collection. When I inserted the same module tag but hard coded the ID in then it works and If I try to just output the data source id outside of the module tag it works but not within the module tag. See below:

{module_webapps id="Properties" filter="all" hideEmptyMessage="true" collection="map" template=""}

{% for item in map.items %}

{{item.['Property Type_id']}} DOES WORK

{module_webapps,25542,i,{{item.['Property Type_id']}},,,,,true template="/ModuleTemplates/WebApps/PropertiesTypes/name.tpl"} DOES NOT WORK

{module_webapps,25542,i,7439185,,,,,true template="/ModuleTemplates/WebApps/PropertiesTypes/name.tpl"} DOES WORK

{% endfor %}

Also, I second what Liam said about having an option not to choose a selection from the data source in the web app. I have brought this up several months ago as what would seem like an easy update that is very crucial.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 14:14:14 GMT

{module_webappscount id="Properties" filter="classified" itemId="/Properties/States/Texas" collection="collectionName" template=""} DOES NOT WORK

{module_webappscount id="Properties" filter="classified" itemId="123456" collection="collectionName" template=""} DOES WORK

I know you can just do this {module_webapps id="Properties" filter="classified" itemId="/Properties/States/Texas" collection="collectionName" template=""} {{collectionName.items | size}} or {{collectionName.items.size}}

But again the documentation is inaccurate and indicates the above should work So should add the ability to put named categories for {module_webappscount} or on the documentation should indicate that you can only use ID for classified as and or give the preferred method of getting a web app count which now might be just outputting the {module_webapps} and do either {{collectionName.items | size}} or {{collectionName.items.size}}.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 05:40:45 GMT

JSON issue:

Pages you create and set as json do indeed render a json output.

But there are some issues with this:

1. jQuery Ajax call where you specify the dataType will fail because the headers are still in html

2. If you have no datatype specified with your jQuery Ajax call it will try to consume the data as json but will again fail because the headers are still html

3. Modules in a page as part of the json do not render, the { is converted into its html entity at the start preventing it to render (BC seems to be escaping it before it realises it is a module and needs to be rendered)

The only way to pass the json is to set the dataType as html.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 06 Nov 2014 05:33:54 GMT

{module_webapps id="12312" filter="all" resultsPerPage="30" hideEmptyMessage="true" render="collection" collection="myCollection" template=""}

When you run a module as a collection it creates white space markup in your code.

Html:

It has not been used yet but you can see it renders a white space which effects your markup appearance.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 06 Nov 2014 04:47:20 GMT

Collection Item issue:

You can get the size of a collection - theCollection.items.size - Like with other things though this returns a string. You would expect a number so you can use it and apply math to it.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 06 Nov 2014 04:25:58 GMT

Admin / Collection conflict issue:

When you grab a module in the admin and insert it, the field for number of items is set to 10.

When you insert the module by default it does not include the property for resultsPerPage. It only does when you put in a new value into the field.

When you try using collection/render etc no items are returned because it requires resultsPerPage.

Fix Suggestion:

by default results PerPage should include a value, this would save some hassles.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 06 Nov 2014 03:24:26 GMT

Another solution would be to use the following:

{module_secureurl includeProtocol="true" URLencode="true" collection="my_custom_collection_name" template=""}

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 06 Nov 2014 03:10:40 GMT

Hi, hope this hasn't been mentioned before but here goes...

Found a bug when adding new {module} tags into HTML tag attributes and editing inside the online editors.

When passing {modules}:

{module_secureurl includeProtocol="true" URLencode="true"} << --- correct

{module_secureurl includeProtocol='true' URLencode='true'} << ---- incorrect

When passing modules inside an HTML tag attribute such as <form action="">:

<form action='{module_secureurl includeProtocol="true" URLencode="true"}/FormProcessv2.aspx'> << --- works

<form action="{module_secureurl includeProtocol='true' URLencode='true'}/FormProcessv2.aspx'> << --- broken

However, when a customer edits the form or page or contentholder etc (I may end up using {% include %})

You cannot have use single quotes for attributes in the online editors where clients visit as the editor converts <form action='/FormProcessv2.aspx'> to <form action="/FormProcessv2.aspx">

So you have to use old school {module_secureurl,includeProtocol,URLencode} instead of {module_secureurl includeProtocol="" URLencode=""}

Proposed solutions:

Either allow {module_secureurl includeProtocol='true' URLencode='true'} to render correctly, or

Allow single quotes in the new editor. <form action='/FormProcessv2.aspx'> or

Both.

Thanks

Stephen

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 05 Nov 2014 23:11:40 GMT

I have a web app with two image custom fields.

This is the output:

You can see that the second custom image field has basically spazzed out and it just renders html and set's its source as the first one. It was not doing this before, this appears to be a new bug.

- This occurs if the second custom image field is blank

- If the secondary custom field has an image it renders normally.

What I expect to be happening:

- Custom image field values should be blank (empty)

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 04 Nov 2014 21:13:18 GMT

Hey Scott,

Cristinel has pointed out in another thread that the caching only works for pages and templates. It does not work in modules and includes. This includes the blog for example.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:48:17 GMT

Actually I have an update to my previous post about browser caching. I have identified what's going on. Anything that is in a content holder is not appending the unique identifier.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:42:20 GMT

This is in regards to the new browser caching. Would you guys be able to document somewhere the known limitations right now? I'm noticing that some images are being appended with the a unique identifier while others aren't. I can't seem to pinpoint why. Do you guys know? Also, my script files before the closing body tag do not append the unique identifier. Only if I put them in the head of the document. Also, can we manually append "?bc_t=" to set the http cache headers if BC automatically doesn't detect them? We'd probably have to update the unique identifier every time we make a change but do you recommend this or no? Thanks!

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 04 Nov 2014 01:07:27 GMT

Thanks Liam, I'll mess around and see.

I also have discovered like many others that the categories need improving. We should be able to retrieve and assign by name as well, not just the id. It would also be beneficial to be able to output the classification ID instead of just the name on the webapp item layout. something like {classification_id}. Right now I have discovered that it is impossible to retrieve a specific category ID without having to loop through all of the categories to do a name match. This is fine with just a few categories, however, when you have potentially hundreds it becomes a not so desirable method. Are there any plans to improve this? either through API retrieval/update. Or on the front end by being able to display a classification ID or through a new {module_data} for webapps perhaps?

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 07:27:56 GMT

Scott Shefler wrote:

{module_menu menuID="1697428" template="/ModuleTemplates/Menu/accountlinks.tpl"}

Specifying a template for the menu doesn't seem to be working. Renders just the regular old menu when doing so. Your documentation indicates this should work so if it's not supported yet should say so on the documentation.

This is one instance the documentation is ahead of the game . We already have a build that has support for that, but it's not deployed yet. Most likely will make it in the next release.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 07:25:50 GMT

Scott Shefler wrote:

Not sure if this is a bug or how things are done in liquid but in a list layout of a web app:

{{customfield}} - Custom field with no space will render like this

{{this.["custom field"]}} - Custom field with space will render like this

{{["custom field"]}} - Custom field with space will NOT render.

Why do I need "this" for custom fields with spaces but not for fields with out spaces?

Liquid is not designed to support variable names with spaces. It works with the this syntax because that is a collection and it access it using a hash key ("custom field") which is a string where you can use spaces.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 05:23:17 GMT

Yeah, There is something you do for that... I can not remember right now though. Hopefully someone chimes in... You got to specify it similarly.

Dam, Sorry really busy, I actually done this because I built a category exporter app for our use. I do not know without looking at my laptop

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 05:19:38 GMT

Yes Liam, it was the syntax. I just noticed however, using the API to create categories, when specifying a "parent id", it creates the category, but it does not place it on the second level underneath the parent that was specified. It creates it at the root level. Here is the code (basically same as documentation). Any ideas?

var request = $.ajax({

url: "/api/v2/admin/sites/current/categories",

type: "POST",

processData: false,

headers: {

"Authorization": $.cookie('access_token')

contentType: "application/json",

data: JSON.stringify({

"name": "catName",

"parent": "93061"

})

});

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 23:47:13 GMT

Not sure what it was, but was classified your secondary?

Yeah, so it is very similar to how it is in an import export in a folder tree output.

Was it that syntax?

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 23:03:17 GMT

You're right Liam. Thanks

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 21:01:53 GMT

{module_webapps id="23198" filter="c" sortType="date" itemId="firstlevel/secondlevel" hideEmptyMessage="true"}

This works for me.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 20:01:09 GMT

I just came across what seems to be another bug. When displaying web app items by classification, everything works just fine when using an id, however, when using the "name" of the classification instead of ID it only renders if the name of the category is a level 1 tier/main category. If it is a sub category, it will not render.

This renders fine if "shop" is a top level category. If it is a sub-level category, it does not.

{module_webapps id="25143" filter="classified" itemId="shop"}

{module_webapps,25143,c,shop,,,,,,,}

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 22:42:55 GMT

Scott, they mentioned about the Menu stuff at Max if you remember.

Since the menu module has its own layouts and multiple folders it works differently. For a new layout you just declare it and have the new folders. OR you can run it as a collection.
So that will be a bit different. If you want multiple menu layouts you can already do it.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 20:02:43 GMT

Not sure if this is a bug or how things are done in liquid but in a list layout of a web app:

{{customfield}} - Custom field with no space will render like this

{{this.["custom field"]}} - Custom field with space will render like this

{{["custom field"]}} - Custom field with space will NOT render.

Why do I need "this" for custom fields with spaces but not for fields with out spaces?

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:39:53 GMT

{module_menu menuID="1697428" template="/ModuleTemplates/Menu/accountlinks.tpl"}

Specifying a template for the menu doesn't seem to be working. Renders just the regular old menu when doing so. Your documentation indicates this should work so if it's not supported yet should say so on the documentation.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:19:53 GMT

Good work

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:28:21 GMT

Yes, there is a problem with the 2 modules (module_blogsitepost and module_blogpostlist) - they are both affected by the same bug.

We already have a fix and will be deployed ASAP.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 07:57:31 GMT

Liam Dilley wrote:

Does look like an as of today bug.

Another bug (sorry guys, there just seems to be so many)

This does it with modules as well..

If you have two instances of a thing:

{tag_cataloguelist,20,,,,true,true}
{tag_cataloguelist,20,,,,true,true template="" collection="catalogList"}

Both sets will fail to render as you have decalred a collection, they are not treated seperatly. So if in one instances you wanted to run as per normal and another something else... BC wont render the other tag/module.

- If you have both items with different collections, only the last will render.

- If the last item is a normal tag/module and the first is a collection neither will render as a collection

Hey Liam. Tags currently do not have support for template="" collection="" or render="item|collection".

We're looking at a solution to have more control of the tags in the overall (that actually behave like modules), but this is not solved yet.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 01:17:32 GMT

Does look like an as of today bug.

Another bug (sorry guys, there just seems to be so many)

This does it with modules as well..

If you have two instances of a thing:

{tag_cataloguelist,20,,,,true,true}
{tag_cataloguelist,20,,,,true,true template="" collection="catalogList"}

Both sets will fail to render as you have decalred a collection, they are not treated seperatly. So if in one instances you wanted to run as per normal and another something else... BC wont render the other tag/module.

- If you have both items with different collections, only the last will render.

- If the last item is a normal tag/module and the first is a collection neither will render as a collection

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 23:01:25 GMT

Thanks Liam but yeah i already tried that same result
{module_blogsitepost,12618,2, template="/Layouts/Blog/custom.tpl"}

the KB says you can just use {module_blogsitepost,numberOfPosts} thats all i used before and it was working that documentation might be dated though.

Modules - Quick Reference

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 23:00:14 GMT

Will need to look at this then

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 22:55:21 GMT

It is a bug Liam. We were just reporting it to support as well. It worked yesterday but not today, either with the legacy format or the new format. I even tried your code and it doesn't use the custom layout.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 22:48:52 GMT

I have this Paul:

{module_blogpostlist,-1,5, template="/_System/CustomLayouts/blog-list-latest.tpl"}

Liquid Beta enabled site

Works fine.

Yours does not because you have not entered the correct number of commas in your module.

They are...

{module_blogpostlist,ID,count,tag}

So you either need to format it into the new module syntax OR correctly format it.

You need to specify the ID of the blog or -1 for all, you need to specify the amount and if you have no tags you still need the comma.

So to re-iterate - this is not a bug, you just not got the correct attributes on it.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 22:42:56 GMT

Editor issue: This video shows how the editor is not applying formatting when you select it to.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 22:22:23 GMT

{module_blogsitepost} with Liquid beta enabled is currently not loading custom templates

{module_blogsitepost,2 template="/Layouts/Blog/custom.tpl"} for example is not working it is just loading the standard template.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:22:50 GMT

More surprised they actually work as no one has shown to do that.

But that will be more render time like that so if you do that it will always be slower or in fact incorrect because you may have the if run before it renders the value.

Even with shopify they never document to do it that way.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:38:02 GMT

Lucian Cozma wrote:

Yes Daryl, that is a valid use-case that is supported and will remain as is.

Basically for all modules that currently support template="" and collection="" you are able to suppress the output of the module and then use the variable captured using the "collection" parameter as you see fit afterwards.

And I encourage you to use that instead of the liquid capture (whenever possible, of course), since that will be faster than doing the actual render of the module and then assigning a variable to it. By suppressing the output you actually help the rendering engine by not actually rendering that module, but just capturing the data.

Ok, just was a bit concerned because {module_customerfield,123456,9876543} in this case doesn't really have a "template" to suppress so to speak. So in actuality you're just suppressing the value of the field which is why I though it might not be officially supported. Also since there is no actual template to render, I think Liam might be right that capture should be just as fast. But I would like some clarification.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:08:49 GMT

Liam Dilley wrote:

There is none yet Daryl. No issues caused

With your IF it actually wont work in several cases if you try and do it with the braces and all documentation you will see out there will not have them.

In cases where you do an operation on them (plus, minus, etc.), aren't you going to need the braces anyway? This is what I meant when I said I want to be consistent. Also makes it easier to tell find the liquid variables in my editor.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 06:41:41 GMT

If you have a module inside a detail view of a web app you can do the following:

{module_webapps id="23097" filter="i" itemId="{tag_related 1_id}" resultsPerPage="5" hideEmptyMessage="true" template="/_System/CustomLayouts/related-article.tpl"}

This works

You have the ID available in Liquid like this - {{this.['Related 1_id']}}

This will render the correct ID

{module_webapps id="23097" filter="i" itemId="{{this.['Related 1_id']}}" resultsPerPage="5" hideEmptyMessage="true" template="/_System/CustomLayouts/related-article.tpl"}

This though will not render anything.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 06:19:58 GMT

{{this|json}} used within a template, detail view of a web app, page etc returns an invalid json output

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 06:17:53 GMT

Hey guys, This is not a new bug but one that is ever increasingly a big issue.

The data source field on web apps - You can never have it blank. The dropdown always selects the first item. There needs to be a blank default option in the dropdown for data source and then the user chooses one.

If you use this to then say it is always mandatory no matter what is not manageable.

Thanks

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:25:45 GMT

There is none yet Daryl. No issues caused

With your IF it actually wont work in several cases if you try and do it with the braces and all documentation you will see out there will not have them.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:47:12 GMT

In terms of your if by the way as well...
{%if aNumber >= anotherNumber %}

You do not need the braces as your in a liquid operator.

Thanks for the tip Liam. :-) Although I think I would just prefer the consistency unless there are some downsides I'm not aware of. It seems the documentation usually includes the braces.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:46:15 GMT

Liam Dilley wrote:

I would also get in the habit of doing - {% -%} to suppress the whitespace

I don't see any documentation on suppression of whitespace. Can you point me to it? I would actually like to suppress whitespace throughout an entire template if that's possible and if there aren't any unforeseen issues that might cause.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 20:45:26 GMT

For a single data field Lucian? That seems very oTT to me, if anything all single data outputs like a custom field need to have an output option rather then going through collection="" template=""

And then you have other cases such as module_today for the date which renders javascript (Liquid's date feature not working in BC) so how would you use that as well for example, only capture the render works.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:18:39 GMT

Scott Shefler wrote:

{module_url param="type"} Does not work when inserted in attribute elements.

For example:

<div data-tagurl="{module_url param="type"}"> Does not work

<div data-tagurl='{module_url param="type"}'> Does not work

<div data-tagurl="{module_url param='type'}"> Does not work

These all render 

When I place it on the page regularly it renders fine.

This is a valid bug.

May I recommend a temporary workaround for this? Use {{globals.get.type}} instead of module_url.

That should work without any issues until we fix this bug.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:56:59 GMT

Daryl Barnes wrote:

Lucian Cozma wrote:

Liam Dilley wrote:

User stuff:

1.user object under globals does not contain username when logged in

2. {{globals.get.username}} or {{this.globals.get.username}} does not appear to work, I thought this was the method to get the username.

Re #1: username will be added in the globals.user variable int he next release (along with entityId): globals.user.username and globals.user.entityId

Re #2: globals.get contains GET parameters passed via URL, so it will not contain user information.

Lucian, I don't think this is documented but I was able to do this:

{module_customerfield,123456,9876543 collection="aNumber" template=""}

Using {this | json} I found out this successfully suppresses the output of the field and allowed me to access and assign the value of the field to a liquid variable and perform logic on it like so:

{% assign aNumber = aNumber.value %}

{%if {{aNumber}} >= {{anotherNumber}} %}

Do something...

{%endif%}

This is pretty awesome because you can't use the {module_customerfield} itself in a liquid if statement. But since it's not documented can you tell me if this is expected to stay?

Yes Daryl, that is a valid use-case that is supported and will remain as is.

Basically for all modules that currently support template="" and collection="" you are able to suppress the output of the module and then use the variable captured using the "collection" parameter as you see fit afterwards.

And I encourage you to use that instead of the liquid capture (whenever possible, of course), since that will be faster than doing the actual render of the module and then assigning a variable to it. By suppressing the output you actually help the rendering engine by not actually rendering that module, but just capturing the data.

Re: Bug List thread

forums_noreply@adobe.com — Mon, 27 Oct 2014 22:28:08 GMT

You can use less Daryl by using capture.

{% capture youVal -%}{module_customerfield,123456,9876543}{% endcapture -%}

You would then have that value and can run accordingly with out OTT use of collection and template
I would also get in the habit of doing - {% -%} to suppress the whitespace

In terms of your if by the way as well...
{%if aNumber >= anotherNumber %}

You do not need the braces as your in a liquid operator.