Document Imaging & Workflow
Jody Chassereau
drcakes at hotmail.com
Sun Sep 16 21:10:52 EDT 2001
Hi - thanks for the feedback on the reject option. First off, I have never
used that option on the step control screen, but I have read the help behind
it based on your suggestion. I understand it creates an exception
Processing rejected that you must handle in your workflow. That is a great
thing to know because I did not think I even had that kind of option to give
users. The more I hear on this, the more I realize there is a ton of things
I have not been exposed to in workflow yet.
Now, my follow-up is this: on the step I needed this for, the option was
grayed out. I looked at some others and also saw they were not selectable.
Then I realized that it is a choice if your task is synchronous. The task I
wanted to use this with was in our Document Imaging process where a
processor receives a work item to enter a document in R/3 for an incoming
imaged invoice. The task I cloned this after was an asynchronous task based
on IMAGE - ASSIGNED. So does this mean I cannot use your option here?
Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks again.
Jody Chassereau
drcakes at hotmail.com
>From: Rsahasranam at worldbank.org
>To: drcakes at hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: Document Imaging & Workflow
>Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:48:13 -0400
>
>
>I have got to this thread fairly late and I am a bit surprised that nobody
>has
>suggested this yet. You can enable the reject execution for a task. Then
>the
>Workflow can be terminated when the user rejects execution. Is there some
>reason
>this won't work for you?
>
>
>
> Jody Chassereau
> <drcakes at hotmail.com To:
>Sap-Wug at Mitvma.Mit.Edu
> > cc:
> Sent by: SAP Subject: Re: Document
>Imaging & Workflow
> Workflow
> <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVM
> A.MIT.EDU>
>
>
> 09/14/2001 01:34 PM
> Please respond to
> SAP Workflow Users'
> Group
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Thanks Greg - that was one thing I had thought of. I just didn't want to
>have our Security group set a 'dummy' user if there was an easier or better
>way to address it. But it would certainly be easy for the users to manage
>and I could control getting rid of work items from there on a periodic
>basis.
>
>Thanks for the suggestion...
>
>Jody Chassereau
>drcakes at hotmail.com
>
> >From: Gregory Kowalik <gkowalik at ashland.com>
> >Reply-To: SAP Workflow Users' Group <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> >To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> >Subject: Re: Document Imaging & Workflow
> >Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 12:17:52 -0400
> >
> >I have created a special user ID - WF_TASH that I told my users to
>forward
> >imaging workitems to.
> >I also have a periodic job that marks these workitems "canceled" after
>six
> >months of their creation date (this gives them time to go back and look
>at
> >them in case they forwarded by mistake).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Jody Chassereau <drcakes at hotmail.com>@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> on 09/13/2001
> >10:38:45 PM
> >
> >Please respond to "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> >
> >Sent by: SAP Workflow <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> >
> >
> >To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> >cc:
> >Subject: Re: Document Imaging & Workflow
> >
> >
> >Thanks to all who replied about handling this configuration. I was
>always
> >told by the team providing the content manager solution that some parts
> >were
> >not transportable and that opening up config in each system was the only
> >way
> >to do this efficiently. I have been able to set everything up directly
>and
> >with transports as suggested here, so obviously they weren't entirely
> >correct.
> >
> >It sure seems like a lot of work to align 3 environments (plus a
>potential
> >4th for Training clients), especially considering the many different doc
> >types we are defining (to provide expanded descriptions in the Inbox for
> >processors). But at least we now have things in QA.
> >
> >I will ask one workflow-related question on this: what is the best way to
> >deal with incoming image work items in an SAP inbox that are determined
> >unnecessary to process into R/3? I know I can delete them as an
> >administrator, but that doesn't seem practical - and the users cannot
> >delete
> >a work item not completed. I don't think there is a Wait for event step
> >that would help here to terminate the workflow. I could only think of a
> >Latest End deadline to finally get rid of something after a period of
>time,
> >but I don't think that will meet their needs as well. Any ideas on this?
> >I
> >think the task is based off the standard TS30001128 for the IMAGE object,
>I
> >believe.
> >
> >Thanks again...
> >Jody Chassereau
> >drcakes at hotmail.com
> >
> >
> > >From: "Sheth, Neeraja" <Neeraja.Sheth at fnc.fujitsu.com>
> > >Reply-To: SAP Workflow Users' Group <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> > >To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > >Subject: Re: Document Imaging & Workflow
> > >Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:08:19 -0500
> > >
> > >We do the same thing - transport the configuration upto Production with
> >the
> > >correct archive, then change the configuration in Dev and Test to point
> >to
> > >the dev archive.
> > >
> > >Neeraja
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: John A Haworth [SMTP:jhoworth at csc.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:11 AM
> > > > To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > > > Subject: Re: Document Imaging & Workflow
> > > >
> > > > hi
> > > >
> > > > Previously I have achieved this by creating the correct entries in
>the
> > >Dev
> > > > system (i.e. pointing at the Production archive) releasing the
> > >transport,
> > > > and taking it through to production, then changing the config back
>in
> > >dev
> > > > to point at the dev archive. (and do the same for QA but only
> >transport
> > > > those changes to QA)
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jody Chassereau <drcakes at hotmail.com>@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> on 13/09/2001
> > > > 14:39:10
> > > >
> > > > Please respond to SAP Workflow Users' Group <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> > > >
> > > > Sent by: SAP Workflow <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > > > cc:
> > > > Subject: Document Imaging & Workflow
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm hoping that someone in the workflow group that has set up
> > >configuration
> > > > in conjunction with document imaging & ArchiveLink can help answer
> >this
> > > > question for me. Now that we have a process in place in our
> >development
> > > > system that seems to meet most of our needs, I need to move up the
> > >process
> > > > to our QA environment.
> > > >
> > > > What I am wondering is: do you (or can you) use transports to define
> > >your
> > > > ArchiveLink configuration in other systems? It is generally our
> >policy
> > >to
> > > > not open up config, but it seems that may be the only option here.
> > > > Specifically I am referring to entries created under OAC0 (defining
> >the
> > > > archive id), OAC3 (links to document types), OAC2 (maintaining
>global
> > > > types), SOA0 (maintaing doc types), etc. If there can only be one
> > > > archiveid
> > > > defined for a document type, do you have to recreate everything in
> > >QA/prod
> > > > to point to the applicable archive?
> > > >
> > > > I hope this makes sense. Just wondering how others have dealt with
> > >this.
> > > > I
> > > > know some things like SM59 for the RFC destination can just be set
>up
> > > > directly without any problem. Please pass on suggestions if you
>have
> > > > worked
> > > > with this.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance...
> > > > Jody Chassereau
> > > > drcakes at hotmail.com
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
More information about the SAP-WUG
mailing list