Make the owner fields for Case object::Owner ID Email and Case object::Owner ID Name to be visible in rules component

@jagadeesh_kumar_paidimarri Thanks for bringing this up here! Redirecting this to the product team for more visibility. 

If possible please tag the customer here to get the updates. 

@sai_ram customer in question here. This is a pretty severe limitation on what are out of the box SFDC fields. There is too much inconsistency with what fields are available from Salesforce and in what areas fields are available in Gainsight. I would still consider it an improvement if there was at least an explanation so that we could predict availability/lack of availability, although full functionality is obviously desired.

In case anyone comes across this with a similar problem, our workaround was this:

On our participant query, we completed an inner join (merge) of the SFDC case object data set and SFDC user object data set using Case Object::Owner ID and User Object::User ID.

For whatever reason, the owner ID field was available in this instance to allow the join.

Also, this limitation may impact other fields on this and other objects, so hopefully, the enhancement request will tackle the issue broadly and not just these two fields. Thanks!

@bradley sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks for the workaround. This is with the product team. 

@bradley  Aplogies that you had to face this inconvinience. I’ll try to explain whats going on here:

In this particular instance the Owner was looking up to 2 different objects in Salesforce instance. 

The difference in behavior that you might notice is that we do not support looking up to more than one object on Salesforce data. Hence we cannot give that + expansion ability here. In SFDC edition, we had a custom logic which we built and show a .Name and .Email fields whenever there is a lookup to User. This is sometimes erronous - the logic cannot be relied upon for quite a few usecases and technically as well, not recommended. 

You can always do an additional join here. 

@rakesh Thanks for the explanation, it’s helpful to have some idea of what is going on. Disappointing that a standard SFDC field essentially isn’t supported. Would it be possible to alleviate the issue by ingesting the entire object into Gainsight and using that new GS object as a basis for reporting, queries etc.? Or are you saying that this field, and any like it are essentially inoperable as they are without conducting additional workarounds as I posted above?