Need assistance with SuppressTableRow merge tag

​@RobinD 

Since every tenant may use slightly different syntax depending on whether they’re using DocuSign CLM (formerly SpringCM), DocuSign eSignature for Salesforce Advanced Templates, or even older custom code, some trial-and-error is often necessary.  Can you confirm if you are using DocuSign CLM or DocuSign eSignature Advanced Templates?

​@JohnSantos I am using Docusign CLM. Thanks!

​@JohnSantos would you be able to help me with this by any chance?

This statement hides the table row regardless if it evaluates to true or false (I need it to evaluate to true)

<# <SuppressTableRow Select="(//Pharmacy_Products[1]/RBD1 = //Pharmacy_Products[1]/R90BD1) and (//Pharmacy_Products[1]/RNEGD1 = //Pharmacy_Products[1]/R90NEGD1)" NotMatch=”true”/> #>

Changing to Match=true doesn’t not suppress the row regardless if it evaluates to true or false.

​@Oskay Taskin tagging you because you have also been so helpful to me in the past! 

​@Oskay Taskin is the best in the business.  You are in really good hands with him.

​@Oskay Taskin! So great to hear from you, and that you so much for the detailed explanation. Everything is good over here!

Unfortunately this is still not working. No matter what I try, it either hides the row regardless of how it evaluates or shows it. I feel like this might be too complicated to solve via this forum, and I’ve spent a ton of time on it. Maybe it just can’t be done! I really appreciate your help!

​@Oskay Taskin ok I decided to keep diving into this. I must be a glutton for punishment! In Freeformatter.com, I entered this in the XLM box:

<Pharmacy_Products>
    <RBD1>123</RBD1>
    <R90BD1>123</R90BD1>
    <RNEGD1>456</RNEGD1>
    <R90NEGD1>456</R90NEGD1>
</Pharmacy_Products>

And this in the xpath box:

boolean(//Pharmacy_Products[RBD1 = R90BD1 and RNEGD1 = R90NEGD1])

and the statement evaluated correctly. 😊

I then put this into my template and it’s not evaluating properly:
<# <SuppressTableRow Test="(//Pharmacy_Products[1][RBD1 = R90BD1 and RNEGD1 = R90NEGD1])" /> #>

I also tried this to no avail:

<# <SuppressTableRow Select="(//Pharmacy_Products[1][RBD1 = R90BD1 and RNEGD1 = R90NEGD1])" Match="" /> #>

Any thoughts?

​@Oskay Taskin  I got it to work! I looked at my xml and noticed there were these xxx_unformatted fields so I used them instead: 

<# <TableRow Select="//Pharmacy_Products[1]" /> #>

<# <SuppressTableRow Test="./RBD1_unformatted = ./R90BD1_unformatted and ./RNEGD1_unformatted = ./R90NEGD1_unformatted" /> #>

Glad I decided to stick it out. Thanks again for setting me on the right path!!

Not a glutton for punishment! We’re almost there. Love that you were able to get the XPath to evaluate correctly! This is always the key step.

I just recreated a DocGen & template in my sandbox and was able to get the merge tag working with the logic you provided! It needed “NotMatch” instead of “Match” - I always get the 2 mixed up. 

The new merge tag that worked for me:

<# <SuppressTableRow Select=”((//Pharmacy_Products[1][RBD1 = R90BD1 and RNEGD1 = R90NEGD1]))” NotMatch=””/> #>
 

(A link here explaining the different between Match vs NotMatch and Conditional Select vs Conditional Test)

Assuming the XML coming out of your DocGen does look like the below (with repeating Pharmacy_Products nodes), I’m confident the above tag should work:

<Pharmacy_Products>
    <RBD1>123</RBD1>
    <R90BD1>123</R90BD1>
    <RNEGD1>456</RNEGD1>
    <R90NEGD1>456</R90NEGD1>
</Pharmacy_Products>

<Pharmacy_Products>
    <RBD1>ABC</RBD1>
    <R90BD1>DEF</R90BD1>
    <RNEGD1>GHI</RNEGD1>
    <R90NEGD1>JKL</R90NEGD1>
</Pharmacy_Products>

<Pharmacy_Products>
    <RBD1>MNO</RBD1>
    <R90BD1>PQR</R90BD1>
    <RNEGD1>TUV</RNEGD1>
    <R90NEGD1>WXY</R90NEGD1>
</Pharmacy_Products>

Let me know if this works. If not, your DocGen may be slightly different than what I assumed on mine, but I can feel that we’re almost there!

​@RobinD - forgot to tag you on the above response 🙂 Let me know, I’m determined to get this working!

​@RobinD Lol - clearly I’m not savvy with the forum yet, I just saw you responded before I started to test again. Nice catch noticing the _unformatted nodes! Yep as you noticed, those are easier to work with since they remove any currency, date or number specific formatting etc. Glad I could be of some use😄 Happy 2025!

​@Oskay Taskin thank you so much again for all your help!