Classic file types are no longer available for use as of January 2021. You can transition your classic files or download a PDF. Learn More

How to define Default to "Portion At Fair Value Fair Value Disclosure Member"?

Answered
Request Demo
Hi, Does anyone know how to define "default" to "PortionAtFairValueFairValueDisclosureMember"?  The Default was set automatically by Workiva to FairValueDisclosureItemAmountsDomain.   I tried to look into this by clicking on XBRL Axis Default. and I was not able to switch the default from domain to the "PortionAtFairValue.... "member. 

Any advice?
Thanks.

0

Comments

5 comments

Date Votes
  • Mike
    Hi Stella!

    I believe I can help you resolve this issue. If you follow the steps outlined in this post, it should fix what you are seeing. Specifically, you'll want to look at the steps following Item 3 with the paragraph starting "In case of the single exception..."

    If this does not resolve the issue for you, or if you have any questions on the steps in the link provided, let me know and I'll be happy to help. Have a great day in the meantime. Cheers!
    0
  • Dalisay Pingul

    Hi Mike!

    Thanks for the post!

    The link "in this post" is not working, would you mind relinking?

    Also, I think it's the same topic, but for "Portion at Fair Value Measurement [Member]", I remember a few years ago, this was needed due to the structuring 'error' in the taxonomy, even though it may not be used. We still have this in the outline, and when we tried removing, it would show some sort of error (see screenshot). I didn't dare share the changes to find out the errors. 

    So my question, is this member still required even though we don't use it? Went to the taxonomy and it says 'default' - so does it mean it's still needed?

     

    Thanks a lot!

    0
  • Mike

    Hi Daisy!

    Snap, good catch. That link is from our previous site and I'm not finding it on our new platform. I'll see if I can find the content we had on it, but to answer your nagging question, yes, this weird taxonomy quirk is still required. Here's what it should look like in next gen, for example:

    Does this help? Let me know what questions you have and I'll keep digging in the meantime to see if I can resurrect that previous post. 😉Happy Friday!

    0
  • Dalisay Pingul

    It does help! Darn, it's here to stay... So even for next gen, it should still stay then? Thank you so much for the quick response and have a great weekend!

    0
  • Mike

    Aye, that pesky quirk is still required, even for next gen and the current taxonomy. No problem, and indeed, I did have an enjoyable weekend. Hope the same was true for you. 😊

    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.