While writing data validation rules in the ‘editChecks’ 'editChecks' section of the workflow, these three form the check's basic skeleton of the check.
More information on Data Validation over over here.
A common thought: Multiple records, forms, and rules can be included in “records”, “ forms” and “rules”"records", "forms" and "rules". So, won’t won't it be easier more comfortable for the user to write a block including all the 3 three records, all the forms on which edit checks are to be performed, and define all the rules one below the other?
It will be easier to write, but a very inefficient code. The reason is, checks are performed as per the ‘when’ 'when' part of the ‘rules’'rules'. This identifies the situations when the edit check needs to be applied.
If there are 3 three edit checks involving ‘cpr’ and ‘visit’ and 1 'cpr' and 'visit' and one edit check involving ‘cpr’ and ‘specimen’'cpr' and 'specimen', including all of them together would be an easier a more straightforward but highly inefficient option. The dependencies on specimen specimens will be checked too every time only the ‘cpr’ and ‘visit’ 'cpr' and 'visit' records are accessed.
So, it will be appropriate to include the 3 ‘cpr’ and ‘visit’ 'cpr' and 'visit' checks together and ‘cpr’, ‘specimen’ 'cpr', 'specimen' check in a different records-forms-rules block.
...
Identify the rules that have checks applied on to the records that match.
Group the common standard checks under one records-forms-rules block. If there are no matches, add a separate records-forms-rules block.
...