In most cases, work of creating document belongs to a specific process.And each document has the context of input and output with each other.This means that if all the document of a process is not completed, work of the next process cannot be started and its document cannot be created.For example, in process of development, the process of detail design can be started only after the process of basic design is completed.
In alfresco,I can define fix directory structure as space template and I can create directory using that template.But I cannot define order of work process and I have no more knowledge.
let me know how to implement or customize?
You may have the directory structure created, but you probably need some workflows defined. Workflows will basically do what you need: when one user creates a document and finishes his part of the process, he can mark his part of the work done and pass it to the next step.
You can learn some basics about workflows on Alfresco wiki, of course.
I suggest that you take a look and read the documents at the Custom Workflow Guide and maybe this material.
After that, if you don't understand much, take a look at the samples, then try modifying one of the samples and eventually design your own workflow.
Related
I am new to Xamarin. I have done a couple of smaller projects (2-3 pages, one table). I have a new project that is a great candidate for a shell app. It will have 20 pages, will consume data from a transactional database (cloud hosted) but also have an offline datastore (SQLite). Right now, I just want to get the local version up and running. The template for Shell App generates an IDataService and a MockDataStore. That is a great place to start - but how do I have more than one table? I am a little confused how I would use that. What I would love to see is a template generated shell app that just adds another table (and corresponding list,detail views along with view models. For example, the simple "todo" sample but add a contact table to assign todo tasks to would be perfect. Thanks in advance for your help.
I hope this helps others new to Xamarin. When starting a new project and choosing anything other than the "blank template", the template generates a model (Item) and a services folder containing an Interface (IDataStore) and a MockDataStore. Being new to XAML in general, I spent a lot of time working on getting the UI to look like what I wanted it, learning about Shell navigation and similar topics. Finally it was time to include the data part of my project. Where I got stuck was trying to make sense of the boilerplate code. My understanding of DependencyService was for platform specific code (e.g. Android, iOS) and NOT data service dependency. Further, the templated code is a typed interface (IDataStore). The solution was fundamental - all that interface does is insure CRUD operations are available in whatever you use in a datastore. For me, simply changing IDataStore to not be typed as an Item, solved everything. It allowed me to keep the database layer abstracted away. In my little project, I completed my "MockDataStore" adding additional CRUD operations until I was ready for my real data operations. NOTE: if you generate the WEB API project from the template, it will make more sense - you can flip between your MockDataStore and actual data store.
I’m curious to know how feasible it is to get away from the dependency onto the application’s internal structure when you create an automated test case. Or you may need to rewrite the test case when a developer modifies a part of the code for a bug fix, etc.
We could write several automated test cases based on the applications internal object structure, but lets assume that the object hierarchy changes after 6 months or so, how do we approach these kind of issues?
I can't speak for other testing tools but at least in QTP's case the testing tool introduces a level of abstraction over the application so that non-functional changes in the application often (but not always) have no effect on the way the testing tool identifies the object.
For example in QTP all web elements are considered to be direct children of the document so that changes in the DOM (such as additional tables) don't change the object's description.
In TestComplete, there are a couple of ways to make sure that the changed app structure does not break you tests.
You can set up the Aliases tree of the Name Mapping feature. In this case, if the app structure is changed, you need to modify the Aliases tree appropriately and your test will stay working without requirement to modify them.
You can use the Extended Find feature of the Name Mapping in order to ignore parts of the the actual object tree and search for a needed objects on deeper levels.
This is what I was forced to do after losing all my work twice due to changes on the DOM structure:
Every single time I need to work with an object, I use the Find function with the ID of the object, searching for the object on the Page object. This way, whenever the DOM gets updated, my tests still run smoothly.
The only thing that will break my tests is if the object's ID get changed, but that's not very probable to happen.
Here you can find some examples of the helper functions I use.
Is it possible to place an item in workflow from the event system? The problem I am facing is that we would like to direct components to two different workflows based on what folder they are in (instead of what schema they use), which the Tridion UI doesn't seem to support. I was hoping to write an event that is triggered on check-in of a component, so I can then determine which folder that component is in and direct it into the appropriate workflow from the event.
I'm fine with creation of the event, I'm just totally lost on where to start as far as adding the item to workflow goes. I have looked at the TOM.NET API documentation but really haven't found anything that helps. Any assistance or examples would be appreciated.
As #Jeremy suggests, what you are actually trying to do is not possible.
However you can achieve the same outcome by making the second step of your workflow an automated decision which creates 2 separate workflow branches within one workflow process definition. Your automated decision can read the Org Item of the component and direct it accordingly.
This is not possible - a Component is only added to a WF process when it is saved and its Schema has an associated process definition.
Is there a list somewhere that lays out all of the types of changes that can be made to an existing workflow service that would prevent existing instances of the original workflow from being re-loaded? For example, I recently made a small change to a custom activity (changed a condition in an "if" statement) and all existing workflow instances still load as normal. Now, in the past, I had removed a property on an object that the workflow uses, and when I tried to re-load a persisted workflow instance, it blew up on me.
Does such a list exist? Thanks!
As far as I am aware there isn't a list like that. You really should consider all changes as breaking. If you test thoroughly you will find a few exceptions but these will be mostly changing a single VB expression.
There is no such a list.
As far as I am concerned, you can change VB expressions always editing the .xamlx in a text editor. I say that, because in my case, sometimes the graphical editor (VS2010) changed the ids of the activities without introducing new activities (be carefull with this).
You can also change the whole internal code (not the inputs/outputs parameters) in code activities (.xaml). Because of that, it would be a good idea to put all the "high changeable" logic into code activities in order to be able to modify this logic avoiding problems with existing WF instances.
We are in the process of designing a web site were users can fill an application form and submit it. Once an application is created, it goes through different departments for review.After each review, the department persons log on to the website and update the status of the application. Once review is completed, the application is said to be 'approved'. Also, communication(email) is sent to the applicants updating them about the status of their application.
I am thinking of using Windows Workflow for this application, but am new to it.
Can anyone tell me if it would make sense to use WF for such an app..or would it be an overkill..I was thinking of using a State machine workflow, as each application created goes through different states. One of my major concerns is, this process also involves manual work such as reviewing the application(this could take days) and then updating the status(say by clicking a button on the website). Can workflow handle this kind of thing?
I have gone through many websites, but they talk about very basic examples where states change automatically.But in my case there is a lot of human interaction.
Any help is appreciated
Thanks!!!
Here is a sample on MSDN that describes a very similar workflow that you've described - although they use a Windows Forms client rather than a web client - but those details shouldn't matter given the use of the Workflow Runtime.
I would say that your situation would be well suited to Workflow - long-running workflows are supported by having the runtime automatically persist workflow details at certain points while it runs, so steps that take days or weeks to fulfill are perfectly fine.
"my case there is a lot of human interaction".
That's the easiest kind of thing to build. It's just transactions.
Each stage in the process is a simple web application.
Fetch all items that are waiting at this state. Display them in a list. User picks one.
Display that piece of work. User makes changes. Saves it. Some change will move it to the next state. It's still just an update.
That's it. Nothing fancy.
You just need to very, very clearly define each state.
You must have a simple query that finds work in this state.
You must have a simple update that moves work on to the next state.
The states must be very, very clear and simple definitions. One column with a state name, for example.
The state transition rules, however, may be complicated. If the work is highly manual, it may be as simple as a drop-down list of available states.
If the state transitions are complex, then, perhaps you need something more sophisticated to embody the transition rules. But since it's manual, you don't need much.
Do I need a separate workflow instance for each application created?
I don't know what this can possibly mean. Each "application" that's moving through the pipeline of manual processing steps has a "state" -- the step of the pipeline where it's waiting, right now.
Each application also has a complete history of each state change. I don't know which of this is a "workflow" that could have an instance. They're just states of being of an object.
It is a web application. So it will have some other logic such as view an appln., navigation etc. do I need to accommodate this in the workflow as well?
Yes and No. Yes, each processing stage which show the application so the user at that stage can do whatever value-add thing they do. They add information or they approve information.
Each stage in the workflow is a place where some human being makes a decision and takes an action. So each stage displays all the information the person needs to make the decision. There's no additional view required.
Navigation isn't terribly interesting. People go to pages to see their queues of unprocessed work. I guess you'll have to build a page with some URL's, but there isn't much to that.
Would it be ok to have just a part of the application based on workflow.
Sure. Why not? I'm not sure I understand the question.
Your web apps just queries a queue of stuff out of the database and present that queue of stuff to a person. The person can request details and make changes to a specific item in the queue. One change the person can make will be to move the stuff out of their queue and into someone else's queue.
This isn't very complex. It shouldn't be. What's hard is defining the allowed state changes.