วีดีโอ

10:14-10:20 | Viewing Group Type in SharePoint Admin Center: In a team site, you can see if a group is public or private in the SharePoint admin center, though it may not always be clearly labeled. 10:20-10:28 | Naming Conventions in Teams: In Microsoft Teams, the group type is not always obvious unless named explicitly, such as “private team” or “public team.” 10:28-10:33 | Difficulty Identifying Group Type in Teams: The speaker notes that in Teams, it can be challenging to tell if a team is public or private without specific naming conventions. 10:33-10:45 | Changing Group Settings Post-Creation: You can change the public or private setting of a group after its creation, which significantly impacts permissions and access control. 10:45-10:52 | Fixing Mistakes in Group Settings: If a mistake is made in setting the group type, it can be corrected, but this change has major implications for permissions. 10:52-11:00 | Impact on Permissions: The difference between public and private settings has a huge impact on permissions for sites, groups, and containers. 11:00-11:07 | Importance of Understanding Group Types: Understanding the difference between public and private groups is crucial, especially with broad groups that include everyone except external users. 11:07-11:13 | Broad Group Membership: Broad groups that include everyone except external users can be useful but need careful management due to their wide access. 11:13-11:20 | Transition to Sharing Settings: The session transitions to discussing sharing settings, with Derek taking over to explain tenant-level settings. 11:20-11:27 | Introduction to Tenant-Level Sharing Settings: Derek introduces the topic of tenant-level sharing settings, describing it as the starting point for managing permissions. 11:27-11:33 | Tenant-Level Sharing Toggle: The tenant-level sharing settings include a toggle to allow or disallow guest users in the organization, which is a fundamental control. 11:33-11:41 | Navigating to Tenant-Level Settings: Explains how to access tenant-level sharing settings through the Microsoft 365 admin center, noting that it’s buried under org settings, then sharing, and finally under security and privacy. 11:41-11:46 | Hidden Location of Settings: Highlights the difficulty in finding these settings, with a personal anecdote about needing to call Mark for help locating them. 11:46-11:52 | Additional Service Level Settings: Mentions that there are additional service level settings for SharePoint and Microsoft 365 groups at the tenant level, which are also important to consider. 11:52-11:57 | Importance of Service Level Settings: Emphasizes the significance of these additional settings for managing permissions and sharing within the organization. 11:57-12:03 | Guest Users and Existing Permissions: Points out that unchecking the box to disallow guest users does not remove existing guest users from the tenant, which is crucial for managing ongoing access. 12:03-12:08 | Managing Existing Guest Users: Clarifies that existing guest users retain their access even if the setting to allow guest users is turned off, which can impact permissions management. 12:08-12:17 | Implications for Sharing and Permissioning: Notes that this detail about guest users becomes particularly relevant when discussing sharing and permissioning settings in the following slides. 12:17-12:23 | Allowing External Users: Explains that allowing external users is a fundamental setting that determines whether these users can be added to sites within the organization. 12:23-12:29 | Adding External Users to Sites: Summarizes that this setting controls the ability to add external users to sites, which is a key aspect of managing permissions and access. 12:29-12:35 | Existing Guest Users Retain Access: Reiterates that unchecking the box to disallow guest users does not remove existing guest users, which is important for managing permissions. 12:35-12:42 | Relevance to Sharing and Permissioning: Highlights that this detail about guest users is particularly relevant when discussing sharing and permissioning settings. 12:42-12:48 | Allowing External Users: Summarizes that allowing external users determines whether these users can be added to sites within the organization. 12:48-12:54 | Transition to Next Topic: Prepares to move on to the next topic, continuing the discussion on tenant-level settings. 12:54-13:00 | SharePoint Admin Settings for Tenant: Introduces the SharePoint admin settings at the tenant level, which affect both SharePoint and Teams. 13:00-13:08 | SharePoint Admin Center: Mentions the SharePoint admin center as the location for setting sharing policies and settings for SharePoint and OneDrive. 13:08-13:14 | Policies and Sharing Settings: Describes how the policies and sharing settings in the SharePoint admin center are crucial for managing permissions. 13:14-13:23 | Default Sharing Limits: Explains the default sharing limits for SharePoint and OneDrive, ranging from the most permissive to the most restrictive settings. 13:23-13:29 | Adjusting Sharing Limits: Notes that these sharing limits can be adjusted to control the level of access, from open sharing to no external sharing. 13:29-13:34 | Permissive Sharing Settings: Describes the most permissive setting, which allows anyone to open anything without requiring a sign-in, and highlights its risks. 13:34-13:41 | Restrictive Sharing Settings: Describes the most restrictive setting, which limits sharing to people within the organization and disallows external sharing. 13:41-13:47 | Dialing Sharing Settings: Explains that sharing settings can be dialed up or down to find the right balance for the organization. 13:47-13:54 | Additional Limitations and Restrictions: Mentions additional limitations and restrictions that can be applied, such as allowing sharing only with specific domains. 13:54-13:59 | Domain-Specific Sharing: Provides an example of allowing external sharing with specific domains, such as a design vendor or help desk. 13:59-14:07 | Allow Lists for Domains: Explains how to set up allow lists for specific domains to control external sharing more precisely. 14:07-14:13 | Security Group Restrictions: Describes how sharing can be restricted to certain security groups, such as allowing only the IT group to share externally. 14:13-14:18 | Default Guest Sharing Setting: Points out that the default setting allows guests to share items they don’t own, which can be risky. 14:18-14:24 | Concerns About Default Setting: Expresses concern about the default setting that allows guests to share items they don’t own, suggesting it should be unchecked. 14:24-14:29 | Guest Sharing Capabilities: Clarifies that guests can share documents they created or viewed, based on the other sharing settings in place. 14:29-14:34 | Recommendation to Uncheck: Recommends unchecking the default setting that allows guests to share items they don’t own to enhance security. 14:34-14:43 | Risks of Guest Sharing: Emphasizes the risks associated with allowing guests to share items they don’t own, highlighting the need for careful management. 14:43-14:50 | Guest Sharing Capabilities: Clarifies that guest users can share documents they created or viewed, based on the existing sharing settings, which can lead to unintended access. 14:50-14:56 | Recommendation to Uncheck Default Setting: Recommends unchecking the default setting that allows guests to share items they don’t own to prevent potential security risks. 14:56-15:03 | Specific Settings for Files and Folders: Discusses specific sharing settings for files and folders, including who can share links and how those links are shared. 15:03-15:11 | Sharing with Specific People: Explains the option to share with specific people, individual users, people within the organization, or anyone with the link, noting the risks of broad sharing. 15:11-15:16 | Preference for Internal Sharing: Suggests setting sharing options to only people within the organization to maintain control and security. 15:16-15:23 | Default Permissions for Shared Links: Describes the default permissions for shared links, whether users get view or edit permissions by default, and the importance of setting this appropriately. 15:23-15:30 | Setting Default Permissions: Recommends setting default permissions to view rather than edit to prevent unauthorized changes. 15:30-15:35 | Moving to Next Topic: Indicates the transition to the next topic due to the extensive content to cover.

15:35-15:40 | Introduction to Site-Level Settings: Introduces the SharePoint admin center settings for individual sites, distinct from tenant-wide settings. 15:40-15:46 | SharePoint Admin Center for Sites: Specifies that the discussion will now focus on site-level settings within the SharePoint admin center. 15:46-15:52 | Detailed Site-Level Settings: Describes the site-level settings as the “third ring of Hell,” emphasizing the complexity and importance of these settings. 15:52-15:58 | Tenant vs. Site-Level Settings: Clarifies that the previous settings discussed were tenant-wide, while the current focus is on settings specific to individual sites. 15:58-16:04 | Navigating to Active Sites: Explains how to navigate to active sites in the SharePoint admin center to adjust site-specific sharing settings. 16:04-16:10 | Accessing Site Settings: Describes the process of selecting a site and accessing the settings tab to configure sharing options on a site-by-site basis. 16:10-16:16 | Internal and External Sharing Settings: Highlights the ability to set different sharing settings for internal and external users at the site level. 16:16-16:21 | Tenant-Level Restrictions: Reminds that site-level settings cannot override tenant-level restrictions, such as disallowing external users. 16:21-16:27 | Consistency with Tenant Settings: Emphasizes that site-level sharing settings must be consistent with the overarching tenant-level policies. 16:27-16:32 | External Sharing Limitations: Notes that if external sharing is not allowed at the tenant level, attempts to share externally at the site level will result in errors. 16:32-16:39 | 404 Error for Disallowed Sharing: Explains that users will encounter a 404 error if they try to share externally when it is not permitted by tenant-level settings. 16:39-16:45 | Hidden Advanced Settings: Mentions that more advanced settings are hidden under a dropdown labeled “more sharing settings” within the external file sharing section. 16:45-16:51 | Accessing More Sharing Settings: Explains how to access these hidden settings, which provide additional controls for sharing within a specific site. 16:51-16:59 | Default Sharing Options: Describes the default sharing options available once the advanced settings are accessed, including sharing with anyone, new and existing guests, existing guests only, and only people in your organization. 16:59-17:05 | Setting Sharing Levels: Highlights the ability to set different sharing levels depending on the site’s purpose and the desired level of access control. 17:05-17:12 | Revisiting External Sharing Settings: Recalls the initial discussion on external sharing settings, emphasizing their importance in determining who can share with external users. 17:12-17:17 | Impact of Tenant-Level Settings: Notes that if external sharing is enabled at the tenant level, users can share with existing guests, extending access beyond the current security construct. 17:17-17:22 | Sharing with External Users: Explains that allowing sharing with existing guests permits sharing with external users, depending on the tenant-level settings. 17:22-17:28 | Security Considerations: Emphasizes the need to consider security implications when setting sharing options, especially for external users. 17:28-17:34 | Default Sharing Link Type: Introduces the concept of the default sharing link type, which determines the default permissions for shared links. 17:34-17:42 | Collective Groan Over Default Settings: Mentions that the default sharing link type often causes frustration, as it can lead to unintended permissions. 17:42-17:49 | Importance of Default Link Settings: Stresses the importance of setting the default sharing link type appropriately to avoid creating individual permissions that complicate management. 17:49-17:54 | Setting Default Permissions: Recommends carefully setting the default permissions for shared links to ensure they align with the organization’s security policies. 17:54-18:00 | Avoiding Individual Permissions: Advises against creating individual permissions, as this can lead to a complex and difficult-to-manage permissions structure. 18:00-18:08 | Default Sharing Link to Existing Access: Explains that setting the default sharing link to “people with existing access” prevents the creation of individual permissions on items. 18:08-18:13 | Avoiding Broken Inheritance: Notes that setting the sharing link to anything other than “people with existing access” will break inheritance and create individual permissions. 18:13-18:19 | Impact of Specific Sharing Settings: Highlights that specific sharing settings, such as “specific people” or “only people in the organization,” can complicate permissions by breaking inheritance. 18:19-18:27 | More on Sharing Settings Later: Indicates that there will be further discussion on the implications of different sharing settings later in the session. 18:27-18:33 | Introduction to Site-Level Sharing: Transitions to discussing sharing settings at the site level, emphasizing the complexity involved. 18:33-18:38 | Another Layer of Complexity: Describes site-level sharing settings as another “ring of Hell,” indicating the additional complexity and hidden settings. 18:38-18:45 | Accessing Site-Level Settings: Explains that site-level sharing settings are only accessible by going into the site, navigating to the gear icon, and selecting site permissions. 18:45-18:52 | Hidden Link for Sharing Settings: Mentions a hidden link under site permissions labeled “change how members can share,” which controls sharing settings within the site. 18:52-18:59 | Controlling Who Can Share: Describes how this setting determines who can share and how they can share within the site, based on specific use cases. 18:59-19:06 | Client Use Case Example: Provides an example of a client who restricted sharing to only site owners, limiting the number of people who could share content. 19:06-19:11 | Restricting Sharing to Site Owners: Explains that setting sharing permissions to only site owners can effectively limit who can share content within the site. 19:11-19:18 | Limited Sharing Group: Notes that this approach results in a very limited group of people who can share, enhancing control over content distribution. 19:18-19:23 | Managing Access Requests: Mentions that this is the only place where you can turn on or off the option to allow access requests in the modern environment. 19:23-19:30 | Conclusion of Thread: Concludes the discussion on this particular thread of sharing settings, indicating a wrap-up of the topic. 19:30-19:35 | Realizing Missed Topics: The speakers realize they missed discussing teams and guests, noting that these topics will be covered later. 19:35-19:43 | Transition to Restricted Access Control: The session transitions to Todd discussing restricted access control, a feature under the SharePoint Premium (SAM) offering. 19:43-19:49 | Importance of Restricted Access Control: Todd explains that restricted access control is crucial depending on the organization, and it’s part of the premium features not included out of the box. 19:49-19:56 | Premium Feature Costs: Highlights that restricted access control is a premium feature that requires additional payment, emphasizing its advanced nature. 19:56-20:02 | Setting at SharePoint Tenant Level: Clarifies that restricted access control is set at the SharePoint tenant level, not the site level, which is an important distinction. 20:02-20:08 | Restricting Access to Specific Groups: Describes how this feature allows restricting site access to people in a specific group in Entra ID, which can be a security group or a Microsoft 365 group. 20:08-20:14 | Importance of Group Membership: Explains that if a person is not in the designated group set at the tenant level, they cannot access the site, regardless of their membership status within the site. 20:14-20:21 | Example of Use Case: Provides an example where only members of an IT group can access IT project sites, preventing unauthorized access from other departments. 20:21-20:28 | Preventing Unauthorized Access: Emphasizes that this feature prevents adding unauthorized users, such as someone from accounting or engineering, to specific project sites. 20:28-20:35 | Error Message for Unauthorized Additions: Notes that site owners will receive an error message if they try to add someone not in the designated group, enhancing security.

20:35-20:42 | Restricting File Sharing: Mentions that this setting can also restrict who files can be shared with, although this feature is not enabled by default. 20:42-20:47 | Disagreement with Default Setting: Expresses disagreement with the default setting that does not restrict file sharing, suggesting it should be an overarching restriction. 20:47-20:49 | Sharing Individual Files: Explains that individual files can still be shared with users outside the designated groups unless this is specifically restricted. 20:49-20:55 | Using PowerShell for Restrictions: Indicates that the only way to enforce these sharing restrictions is through PowerShell, despite the promise to avoid mentioning it. 20:55-22:02 | PowerShell for Advanced Settings: Concludes by acknowledging the necessity of using PowerShell to implement advanced sharing restrictions, despite its complexity. 22:02-22:07 | Permissions and Co-Pilot: Greg mentions an interesting point about permissions and Co-Pilot, noting that if someone is added to a site but restricted access control is later applied, it can cause issues. 22:07-22:13 | Access Issues with Restricted Control: Explains that if someone has access to something but can’t get through due to restricted access control, it will show up in search but they won’t be able to access it, leading to an error message. 22:13-22:19 | Broken Promise Scenario: Describes this as a “broken promise” situation where users see items in search but can’t access them due to restricted permissions. 22:19-22:25 | Scenario Explanation: Discusses how this situation might occur, such as users being added before restricted access control is applied and not being removed afterward. 22:25-22:31 | Error Messages for Restricted Access: Notes that users will receive an error message if they try to access something they are restricted from, despite it appearing in search results. 22:31-22:37 | Reflecting on the Scenario: Reflects on the scenario, suggesting it likely happens when restricted access is applied after users have already been added. 22:37-22:42 | Importance of Cleanup: Emphasizes the importance of cleaning up permissions after applying restricted access control to avoid such issues. 22:42-22:47 | SharePoint Tenant Setting: Reiterates that restricted access control is a SharePoint tenant setting, which supersedes site-level settings. 22:47-22:54 | Applicability to Group and Non-Group Sites: Clarifies that this setting can be used on both group-connected and non-group-connected sites. 22:54-22:59 | Preventing Unauthorized Access: Highlights that this setting is another way to prevent unauthorized access to sites and content. 22:59-23:05 | Summary of Restricted Access Control: Summarizes the discussion on restricted access control, noting its importance and implications for permissions management. 23:05-23:11 | Transition to Permissions Extras: Transitions to discussing additional permissions extras and callouts in Microsoft 365. 23:11-23:19 | Tidbits on Permissions: Introduces a few additional tidbits on permissions, starting with a reference to “anyone in this organization” links. 23:19-23:26 | Preferred Sharing Default: Reiterates that “anyone with existing access” is the preferred default for sharing links to avoid creating individual permissions. 23:26-23:33 | Limitations at SharePoint Admin Level: Notes that this preferred setting is not available at the SharePoint admin level, requiring site-by-site configuration. 23:33-23:40 | Site-by-Site Configuration: Explains that the need for site-by-site configuration often leads to broken links because users may not follow the extra steps. 23:40-23:49 | Impact of Missing Configuration: Highlights the impact of not configuring sharing settings properly, resulting in broken links and permissions issues. 23:49-23:55 | Provisioning Services: Mentions that using provisioning services like ShareGate or Orchestry can help automate these settings during site creation. 23:55-24:06 | Automating Settings with Provisioning Services: Suggests that provisioning services can ensure consistent application of preferred sharing settings, reducing the risk of broken links and permissions issues. 24:15-24:20 | Provisioning Services Copy Settings: Explains that provisioning services like ShareGate and Orchestry copy the preferred sharing settings, ensuring consistency. 24:20-24:27 | Handling Settings Automatically: Notes that these services might handle the settings automatically, but if users create sites manually, this consistency might not be maintained. 24:27-24:34 | Correct Default Setting: Emphasizes the belief that “anyone with existing access” is the correct default setting to avoid breaking permissions and creating mixups. 24:34-24:40 | Impact on Permission Structure: Highlights how incorrect default settings can change the permission structure and lead to permission mixups. 24:40-24:48 | Clarification on “Anyone in This Organization” Link: Discusses a common misconception about the “anyone in this organization” link, clarifying its actual function. 24:48-24:56 | Misconception About Access: Explains that the “anyone in this organization” link does not grant immediate access to everyone; instead, it initiates a process to grant permission. 24:56-25:02 | Permission Process: Clarifies that clicking the link starts a process that grants permission to the site or file, making it more restricted than initially thought. 25:02-25:08 | Restricted Access Process: Emphasizes that the link only grants access after the permission process is completed, which is more secure than assumed. 25:08-25:14 | Understanding Both Options: Reflects on the realization that the “anyone in this organization” link is not as open as the “everyone” link, making it a safer option. 25:14-25:20 | Limited Permission Granting: Explains that the link only grants access to those who click it and complete the permission process, not to everyone automatically. 25:20-25:27 | Reassessing Security Concerns: Reassures that the “anyone in this organization” links are not as risky as they seem, as they require user action to grant access. 25:27-25:33 | Controlled Access: Highlights that access is only granted to individuals who follow the link, ensuring controlled and limited permissions. 25:33-25:39 | Mini Membership Creation: Describes how clicking the link adds users to a “mini membership” for that specific link’s access, maintaining security. 25:39-25:46 | Example of Controlled Access: Provides an example where sending the link to one person grants them access, but they cannot extend it to others without sharing the link. 25:46-25:53 | Misunderstanding of Link Function: Reflects on the initial misunderstanding that the link granted access to everyone, clarifying that it does not. 25:53-25:58 | Realization of Limited Access: Concludes with the realization that the link does not automatically grant access to everyone, but only to those who click and follow it. 26:05-26:13 | Comfort in Limited Access: Discusses the comforting aspect of knowing that links only grant access to those who click and follow them, especially in the context of Co-Pilot.

We agree! Thanks for watching.

We learned a lot putting it together, eh?

@@MarcDAnderson I think so, this stuff is always changing so unless you're looking at it all the time and even digging in to validate how things work it's really difficult to keep up.

It is tough to keep up. Who knew there were just as many “places” as “faces” of permissions!

I can speak to item 3, which we shared information about in this GitHub issue, including a video that shows the behavior: github.com/SharePoint/sp-dev-docs/issues/9910

For some reason I can't see my previous reply. For item 3, yes we shared a detailed video on the GitHub issue 9910 on the sp-dev-docs issue. Let's see if this comment shows up. (I've tried several times and cannot include a link in the comments, I'll update the video description and include it there)

this is the link: github.com / SharePoint / sp-dev-docs / issues / 9910

Sadly, the lists issues continue, and it's really unfortunate.

They have deployed and pulled back a few times, I believe, because they spotted issues. There are also several types of customizations that prevent the new List UI from appearing; this is on a list by list basis. Filtering is just a bit of a mess. Hopefully they will get this stuff fixed soon.

@@MarcDAnderson Fully agree on that. I must say I love the new layout only miss the pane for the item. ^Paul Keijzers

With regard to the updated Microsoft Lists UI appearing and disappearing that would be because you have some type of SPFx extension (or other customization) on the list which the newer Microsoft Lists UI cannot handle and so it was automatically dropping back to the modern lists experience. That wasn't going well and there were a lot of issues raised about it. They are attempting to start the rollout again and if you see issues they're looking to get the feedback on this github issue: github.com/SharePoint/sp-dev-docs/issues/9944

@@juliemturner that is really interesting because I don’t have any customization on there checked multiple tenants maybe it is due to a European tenant

@@kbworks_eu Huh... interesting.. I have no idea but I know the Microsoft Lists UI is theoretically supposed to be rolled out everywhere except if you have any classic features or customizations enabled that aren't supported.

Thanks, glad you enjoyed our presentation (and antics I suppose too)

We even let Todd go first!

The video takes you through the main steps. Each one we build is a little different based on the metadata that's important, how the content should be displayed, etc.

@@MarcDAnderson I eventually figured it out, thanks. Now my problem is, trying to connect the search web part to filter out the results on the results web part. It is just showing every document. I am making progress though, thanks

@danya1383 - The new functionality for using Microsoft Forms to customize your data entry experiences is currently rolling out to all tenants. As you mentioned you can see it in your tenant. It is currently in one of mine and not the other. Once you create the MS Form you will have the ability to share the form. That will give you a URL to the new MS Form. You can embed this in a SharePoint page on your intranet using the Embed webpart and using the Iframe option like so < src="{enter the copy link here}" width="100%" height="500px"></>. This works when you create the list in a SharePoint site. It does not work when you create the list in the Microsoft Lists app. You can also cross different site collections in your intranet so you could have the list live in a HR site and embed the form on your root site. I hope this helps.

@@DerekC-P This is VERY helpful, thank you!!

HAHAHA -- Yes Patrick is incredibly polite, it's one of his superpowers!

You can't just move one video using the migration tool. You could migrate the entire container and delete all the other items or you could download the one video you want to migrate and upload it in the new location. Doing that you would not have the metadata associated with the video anymore, although if you documented the metadata you could use a tool like ShareGate to set the metadata on the video once you upload it to the new location. If you have some experience with coding you could try to edit the migration tool script to just migrate that one asset. We have converted those PowerShell scripts to a Node application that we use to do an export of all the metadata on all the assets so I am sure you can reverse engineer it to migrate assets by ID however for one asset this is probably overkill.

In addition to this issue, I tried using the Calculate field but if Title is blank then the value is set to 0. PNP search sees all empty Titles elements as "float;#0" and items with a title as "string;#TitleGoesHere". Therefore i cant sort the items correctly. Is there a trick to remove the labeling of these so the data is clean?

@Nick-sz1ez you have two options here Option 1: Copy Title Managed Property (My new preferred approach) For this option you would create a new managed property from a RefinableString can map it to all the same properties that are mapped to the out of the box Title managed property. Our friend Kasper Larsen has created a blog post about this. www.m365thinking.com/post/fix-one-of-the-problems-in-sharepoint-search-make-title-sortable Option 2: Create a Calculated Column Create a calculated field that replicates the Title field in the content type gallery. Add this site column to all the content types you would like to be able to sort by. This works great if you have a robust enterprise information architecture and have a based content type for your organized e.g. MyCompanyDocument where you can push this added column down to all content types. The drawback to this as you noted is that the data is stored as string;#MyTitle. I had not run into the float;# if title is blank. As a general rule Title should not be blank as M365 uses it for more than just the search managed property but that is another issue. PnP Search WebPart With either option I recommend using the sortable refinable string for sorting only and using the Title field in the PnP search for display in the web part. That way you don't need to worry about any extra characters. If you did use the calculated column you could use a HandleBars helper function to do a replace on the string;# with empty string giving you the rest of the string. Hope that helps

@@sympraxisc The hardest part of option 1 is actually finding the properties! Searching for Basic or Office has zero results. Instead, searching for "#10" or "#2" was how i found them. I think Microsoft could improve their search functionality inside their search settings. Thank you for the info provided - much appreciated.

@@Nick-sz1ez Yes, I had the same issue, Kasper should add a note to his post.

​@@juliemturner I am working on a PnP.PowerShell script that will map the required crawled props to a RefinableString of your choice. Will that do?

Thanks, Greg. Some of the PowerShell is easier than others, but yes, it would be great to have a reliable “Save site as template” in the UI. And also make it possible to include page configurations!

@@MarcDAnderson True. The lack of the availability to save any site as a template is baffling me. We could do this easily with subsites, we need the same ability with modern sites as well!

@@SharePointMaven The old "Save site as template" option worked on both sites and subsites, but it was based on the old, classic technology. I agree it should be easier to create templates - of any kind - through the UI, though. If you ever need help with it, you know who to call!

Are you using SharePoint search or Microsoft search for your configuration? Assuming you're using SharePoint Search then it's a matter of looking up what fields provide that information in the Search configuration. By default, 'Department' is mapped to 'People:Department' crawled property and 'MobilePhone' managed property is mapped to 'People:CellPhone'. You might start there.

Are you asking a question or suggesting that one is better than the other? In my opinion it depends entirely on the situation and how you might want to use, find, and surface the content later. Less is more, and you need to balance the data entry experience with a benefit analysis. If there's no benefit to complicating things by having the same metadata but with multiple content types then don't, but if there's a use case for being able to filter on certain content types or search for certain content types even if the metadata is all the same then in that case the content type is metadata and it can be useful to have different ones. Lots of room for nuance here. We often say Information Architecture is as much art as it is science, and this is why.

Great question. I would say it depends on the technical maturity of the organization. For a more mature organization, they are going to have the expectation to be able to search and filter based on more defined criteria (ex, department policies, claim forms, benefit overviews, etc.). This requires individual content types. For a lower maturity level organization, a general search for Benefits documents would suffice for a less technical mature organization. This would be a more generic content type like Benefits Document. Ideally, we like to help our clients move up the maturity model, but it is important to recognize where the client is at while providing room to grow.

@@patc-p9497 Ok great! So it sounds like it's best to have "content type" stand in for a managed metadata column to tag a document.

@@dontthroworanges No, a "content type" doesn't replace a managed metadata column outright, content types have the power to define the metadata (fields) associated with a piece of content. It also has the power to be used as a way to query documents as a set and or a related set, through content type inheritance. Managed Metadata fields can be added to content types or just to the base list/library content type (keep in mind everything in SharePoint has a content type) and that then provides a way to tag content with a global term set. So, there are different use cases for them they can work together, and they can be used separately but they're not a replacement for each other.

The information is not moved with the migration, however it is in the reports.

So happy we could help! If you have ideas for other topics we should cover please let us know.

Very true!

So glad to hear you enjoy it! Thanks for watching!!

Yes, absolutely, and depends on the governance structure in an organization. This is why we always like to encourage people to get their own development tenant where they can be a global admin and test things out.

That’s right, @adirnagar6940. Only videos stored in Stream Classic will be available to migrate.

EXACTLY why we did this episode! Of course, there is only so much we can do.

Thanks for your interest, sadly we do not have the pptx deck we used for this recording any longer. Was there something specific you need?

Sorry, I don't think we have a good answer for this.

You're welcome!

That’s a great idea! Perhaps someone at Microsoft will think of that.

Thanks for your thoughts, Dom! They finally fixed the issue of grouping by Content Types so you can do that now :) I love setting a library to grouped by content type so newer users can drag and drop their files in to have the metadata automatically applied per the library grouped view. I bet Marc could talk for hours on MMS vs choice columns vs lookup lists. Let's see if I can convince him :)

@@EmilyMancini-u9z Oh, you know I could! @Dom - Those are some great follow up topics, higher up the maturity scale. We'll definitely put them on the list for a future episode. As for the dark side of Content Types - I don't know of any, frankly. Yes, they take work and foresight to set up, but the benefits they provide you far outweigh the effort over time, if you ask me. I think one of the things people who aren't long-time content managers struggle with is what should be a Content Type vs. a Site Column. As I always say (and probably did in this episode), it's as much art as it is science.

@@EmilyMancini-u9z haha do it!! also, thanks and sorry I bounce between prem and SPO so hard to keep track sometimes

Sadly, we do not have an answer for this.

@mauricio, could you explain a bit more? I'm not sure how Dataverse comes into this.

Thank you for your time to answer… I resolved the issue, the column field was limited to 100 characters 😅 My issue now is Stream on Sharepoint url is not compatible with Stream component in Powerapps. 🥴 Hace a great day and if there is anything I can help on please consider me!

@MarcDAnderson

Sorry we don't have any guidance for you here.

You're welcome!

Delve is surfacing the same user profile information, creating a great entry point for employees to edit their information if their organization allows that access. There is no Delve web part to add that user interface into SharePoint Online though the People web part is bringing that same user profile data over, so there is no need.

And a later follow-up: Delve will be retired 15 Dec 2024

Thanks, Kasper! Are there any aspects of search you’d like to see us cover in a future AskSympraxis?

@Marc D Anderson not really. You covered the subject pretty well. I would perhaps have mentioned the option to use Result Types for custom display templates, but that is a brand new feature.

@@KasperBoLarsen Useful for a follow up session. If you think of anything else, please let us know!

I hope you enjoyed the webcast. I haven't done battle with the Windows Search Indexer for a while, so I'm kind of working off of memory here. I know you can exclude folders from the Indexer. Have you tried explicitly excluding the OneDrive folder? (C:\users\username\OneDrive\)

@@PendragnTK Very much enjoy all of your webcasts! Thanks! Yes, I did try excluding the location as well but didn't seem to make a difference (bug maybe?). However, there still is the issue of the preview pane not previewing cloud only files (which makes perfect sense). Learning a lot of little pain points by going this route. Current contender as a replacement for this scenario is OnePlace Explorer which doesn't bring anything onto the client unless specifically downloaded. Search and preview pane work as well. Thanks Todd!

@@dontthroworanges I agree that's probably a bug. Have you reproduced it on other boxes?

@@PendragnTK Unfortunately we experienced it on essentially all machines I pushed the configuration out to. Granted I should have tested this more but it did seem like the issue grew over time. Also something to note, we originally tried the same scenario with the document libraries within the same site as a couple of old-school contact lists that are linked with Outlook. Same issue happened but within Outlook via it's connection to the Search Indexer. Was very surprised by this. Anyway, don't want to turn this youtube comment section into a help article haha. If you want to discuss further I think you can send me a direct message. Anyway, thanks again for the excellent SP content!