Reassign workitem to different agent

[Michael Pokraka]

Hi Jocelyn,
Thanks, that was exactly the answer I was looking for; but on the other
hand since we're on 4.6c, the 6.10 part is not what I was hoping for.
 
It's good to know and keep in mind for upgrade paths,
Thanks
Mike
 
 
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 10:47:56AM +0100, Dart, Jocelyn wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> Yes there is but you have to wait until Basis 6.10.
> In 6.10 you can set an event for the workflow which causes the agents
> of all active work items in the workflow to be re-evaluated.
> So then your deadline path simply holds the calculation of the next lot
> of agents and raises the event to trigger the re-evaluation.
> If you need to keep looping until the next deadline then your loop is just in the deadline
> path only.  You can trigger the event as many times as you want.
> Regards,
>         Jocelyn Dart
> Consultant (SRM, EBP, Workflow)
> and co-author of the book
> "Practical Workflow for SAP"
> SAP Australia
> email: jocelyn.dart at sap.com
> phone: +61 412 390 267
> fax:   +61 2 9935 4880
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Pokraka [mailto:workflow at quirky.me.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2003 4:08 AM
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Reassign workitem to different agent
>
>
> Greetings all,
> I've a simple enough requirement which seems to pop up everywhere:
> When deadline expires, send workitem to someone else.
>
> Now, to do this I can create a loop, evaluate agents, put them into an
> container element, do task, check deadline expiration, if expired,
> assign new agents and loop again. Not a major thing, but it does seem
> overly complicated and will start to look pretty ugly if you have 12
> tasks in a workflow which require this sort of construct.
>
> My question thus: is there a 'cleaner' way of doing it? I was pondering
> various alternatives, setting container flags to pass to a
> responsibility (still needs a loop), or writing some ABAP to change it
> to error status and perform a restart - this should reevaluate
> the agents, but I'm not overly happy with the future comatibility of
> that type of approach.
>
> Any thoughts on this appreciated,
> Cheers
> Mike