I have 3 CTPs: Resources [A], Solutions [B] and Products [C].
I am trying to setup the relationship so that each [A] can be assigned to multiple [B] and [C]. "Each Resource is referencing multiple Solutions and Products ". And I need [A] to be filterable by [B] and [C]. "Resources should be filterable by Solutions and Products".
I have created many to many relationships between [A] <<>> [B] and [A] <<>> [C]. When creating or editing [A] I am able to connect it to [B] and [C] as intended.
But the problem is that I am not able to setup the filtering for some reason. Once filtering by [B] is setup (and working), I am not able to even add filtering by [C] - the "Post relationship" button is inactive. Here is a screenshot: hidden link
And if I try to copy the [B] filter code and change parameters to [C], the view would through a suggestion to remove the filter from query.
Please let me know where I am wrong with filtering setup and how can this be fixed?
Managing Solutions or Products as custom taxonomies would be possible only if there is a way to automatically sync taxonomy records with related CPT. Otherwise I would need to manually update taxonomy records each time a Product/Solution is added or removed.
As there is no straightforward feature or workaround available to keep the CPT posts and custom taxonomy terms in sync, this setup can further add to the complexity and become difficult to manage, in the long run. I wouldn't recommend using the CPT and custom taxonomy, both at the same time, for storing the same elements.
Is there any specific reason, you'd want to keep CPT for 'Solutions' and 'Products'? While using taxonomy terms, you can use the single term's archive page, as a replacement for the single CPT page and you can add term fields with taxonomy terms similar to how custom fields can be added with CPT posts.
I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm pushing the idea of using a custom taxonomy. It's just that, I can't think of any other efficient and reliable workaround/alternative available for the requirement, that you've shared.
To answer your question "Is there any specific reason, you'd want to keep CPT for 'Solutions' and 'Products'?"
Both 'Solutions' and 'Products' have their own pages and they are key to our business. Both are being added/edited/removed frequently. Both don't fit the limited capabilities of taxonomy format.
'Resources' (webinars, ebooks, downloads, etc) reference 'Solutions' and 'Products' and the reason why I need this many-to-many relationship is I want my users to easily navigate to related 'Solution' or 'Product' from a 'Resource' page.
Thank you for sharing these details, and in light of this, it makes sense to keep the CPTs for 'Solutions' and 'Products'.
The only other workaround I can think of is to add two separate and independent views, side-by-side, on your search page. One can provide the option to search 'Resources' by 'Solutions' and the other can provide the ability to search 'Resources' by 'Products'.
This ticket is now closed. If you're a WPML client and need related help, please open a new support ticket.
