Searching metadata related asset's asset name


Matrix Version:

Sample scenario:

  1. A metadata schema contains Related asset field which allows multiple items to be selected. We’ll call this field “RelatedTitles”

  2. A page named “Old Skool Games” uses this schema and the metadata “RelatedTitles” value is set to other standard pages. The pages are “Moon Buggy”, “Pac Man” and “Montezuma’s Revenge” and these related pages are not in the same folder as “Old Skool Games”.

  3. A search page is set up to search a folder where “Old Skool Games” are located and to also index the “RelatedTitles” metadata values of the pages in this search folder.

  4. What we want is, when someone searches for “Moon” or “Revenge” or “Pac Man” it would return “Old Skool Games” page in the results list.


  1. Search appears to work (i.e. returns “Old school games” in results) if I input the related page’s Asset ID in keyword search.

  2. Search does not work if i input the related page’s asset name (full or partial) in the keyword search. I suspect this is because the “RelatedTitles” metadata exposes only the ID and it doesn’t pull the asset name through to be indexed.

Is there a way to make the Titles of related asset stored in against an index-able page be indexed?

I thought i could use the Metadata tag format, but i dont know how i could achieve this, or of it would work… e.g. replacing the output of meta name="RelatedTitles" content="[735365,735399]" to meta name="RelatedTitles" content="['Pac Man','Montezuma's Revenge', 'Moon Buggy']"

Help please.

(Bart Banda) #2

Hi @nikhatta,
You could try adding another metadata text field that is not editable, and uses the keyword %metadata_field_RelatedTitles^as_asset:asset_name%.

The idea is to print the names of each related asset ID in another field and then target the search to search that field instead.

Edit: Just realised that the ^as_asset keyword modifier on array keywords only came out in, one patch version higher than yours. Are you in a position to get your system upgraded one patch version at all?


The good news is yes, we are upgrading to 5.5. Still, thank you for sharing that solution idea. Lots of new things to play around with when we do upgrade.