Blank text elements show old values

[Michael Pokraka]

Hi Thomas,
This is happening in a decision task, so it appears to be a more generic thing.
Thanks for the update - it is pretty much the sort of confirmation I was looking for.
We're currently in a development freeze/hotpack application mission so I can't reproduce it right now (or it may even go away after we've gone up to hotpack 44). Once I can reproduce it in dev tomorrow I'll report it to OSS.
Cheers
Mike
 
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:38:23AM -0700, Thomas Maue Jr wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Have seen this before and am experiencing it again.  Is your task using the SELFITEM business object?  The problem is the inherited SELFITEM reference with the task element _WI_Object_Id.  I was able to get around this in previous releases by creating a message using the 'send mail' wizard in the Workflow builder.  This created a task without the inherited reference (no more problem).  Now I am in release 4.6C and that wizard is gone (replaced with 'send mail' create step).
>
> I agree that this is a bug and reported it to OSS a long time ago from a different client site.  With the work around and finishing the project, I did not pursue it.  Am searching OSS for notes and will report it again.  Please report it also.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas Maue
>
> Michael Pokraka <workflow at quirky.me.uk> wrote:
> Hi all,
> This smells like a bug to me, but I thought I'd quizz here before reporting to OSS.
> On a 4.6C system, I have a task text with variables - e.g. &ZBUS2012.blah&. All is well, except when the attribute/element evaluates as a blank. In this case, the inbox shows the value of the last workitem displayed in place of the blank value.
>
> In other words: The user executes/displays a decision task, sees all correct values. He then displays another - same task, different object - but this time an attribute which is blank for this object is displayed with the value from the previous one. If it is the first item displayed from the inbox, the value is displayed correctly.
>
> Anyone seen his before? I can't seem to find any notes on it either.
> Cheers
> Mike