Gutenberg/Block-Editor meta-block REST-API update mechanism for ACF-Fields?

Gutenberg allows to save block-values to the post meta ( https://developer.wordpress.org/block-editor/how-to-guides/metabox/#step-2-add-meta-block ).

However, it seems currently impossible to update ACF fields using a meta-block without using a "hack" - that ist replicating the value entered into the meta-block into the key's input field in the ACF metabox - prior to saving the page/post. If the two values differ at the moment of saving, the one in the metabox is apparently saved last, so will take precedence. So unless that value is synchronized with the value entered into the meta-block, the old field-value will be saved instead of the new one.

Using the relevant part of the linked post above, to update the field "legacyField", something like

document.getElementById("acf-field_62f99453a7fa3").value = newValue;

would have to be included in the meta-block update function:

`const [ meta, setMeta ] = useEntityProp( ‚postType‘, ‚postType‘, ‚acf‘ );
const metaFieldValue = meta.legacyField;
const updateMetaValue = ( newValue ) => {
setMeta( { …meta, legacyField: newValue } );
document.getElementById(„acf-field_62f99453a7fa3“).setAttribute(‚value‘, newValue);
};

This post -

https://wordpress.stackexchange.com/questions/408053/update-post-meta-custom-field-using-block-editor

describes the problem for the regular custom field UI in WP. Alas, the suggested workaround will not work for ACF, because using ACF field groups for a post type will create the respective metaboxes, even if they are not shown in the block-editor.

I'm not aware of another way to solve this problem.
Is there?

Otherwise, I suppose it would be better to be able to indicate on a field-group or even field-by-field-basis wether the field should actually appear in a metabox or the update would have to be done through a custom block.

Start with the linked Gutenberg meta-block guide, the ACF metabox save behavior described in the issue, and the linked WordPress StackExchange discussion. Reproduce the conflict between the meta-block value and the ACF field value, then define whether a supported synchronization mechanism or a field/metabox configuration is needed; done means the selected behavior is documented and verified without the described workaround.