Hi Gaby,
I've run into a similar limitation with inspection conditions. The important distinction here is that the two-decimal limitation is with the precision supported by the Inspection Condition/Condition Builder, rather than necessarily meaning that the underlying numeric response cannot store additional decimal places.
If your requirement is something like:
Numeric response = 0.12345 → make another field required
I'd look at a couple of options before changing the response type.
-
First, check the underlying numeric attribute/response definition and confirm what scale is actually being stored. If the response itself supports the required precision but the Condition Builder only allows two decimals, then changing the database attribute won't necessarily solve the condition limitation.
-
If this is a custom inspection requirement, an automation script is probably the cleaner workaround. The script can evaluate the inspection response at the required precision and then set/validate the related field as required or prevent completion when the condition isn't satisfied.
-
Another option is to restructure the condition so you don't depend on the fifth decimal place directly. For example, if 0.12345 represents a measurement that can be scaled to an integer, you could potentially evaluate 12345 instead. Whether that works depends on how the inspection response is being captured and used.
I would be cautious about changing a base numeric attribute's scale directly through Database Configuration just to get around the Condition Builder limitation. That can have broader implications and may not address the actual limitation in the inspection condition functionality.
I also wouldn't switch the response to Alpha/Text unless there is a good reason to give up the native numeric behavior. You can certainly validate a text value with scripting, but then you're taking on additional work for numeric validation, comparisons, reporting, etc.
So, if the requirement is specifically "when the numeric inspection response has a particular value/precision, make another response required," I'd lean toward an automation script or custom validation rather than changing the underlying data type.
If you share the exact inspection question/response type and the condition you're trying to build, I can suggest the specific approach I'd use.