ECC Log format (warning: rant)

Mon Mar 10 07:03:03 EDT 2008

Hi Mike, I felt the same pain and got no idea of what's useful about the new stuff. I have found in some note/mail here about that Ctrl-P-Thing. Curiously, the official shortcut for the printer-icon is usually Ctrl-P, which you see when you first enter that log. But clicking that printer icon doesn't bring you to the expected technical screen.

However, if someone is in need to have a technical view about a workflow log, there's usually a problem which needs some thoroughly investigation. That person will need technical details and not a fancy slow-working log with bubbles.

If you have a WI_ID at hand and the right authorization:
SWL_SHOW_PROCESS_DATA wi_id + check "WITH_TECHDETAILS" + check "OLD_TECH_LOG"
But that aint any faster than that Ctrl-P thing?

Cheers,
   Florin

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 10:29:02 -0000 (UTC)
> Von: "Mike Pokraka" <wug at workflowconnections.com>
> An: "SAP Workflow Users\' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> Betreff: RE: ECC Log format (warning: rant)

> Thank you for the great suggestion regarding the influence council, I
> shall collect all the responses and print thm out and take them there in
> person, so keep 'em coming folks! :-)
> 
> Regarding ctrl-p, great tip. Though when I last tried it it would give me
> the 'user' style tech log without container icons, so a further switch is
> necessary to get to the real tech log. It occasionally still does, and I
> haven't figured out why.
> 
> It still is only a workaround (and an annoying extra step) though, why do
> the nice people at SAP invest significant time and effort in designing a
> fancy new log, but throw ergonomics out of the window and make it a right
> pain to use?
> I would cautiously even suggest that a side-by-side arrangement would be
> more useful than the top/bottom view. Or a multipane view, PPOME-style,
> anything but this.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 
> 
> On Fri, March 7, 2008 1:13 pm, Keohan, Susan wrote:
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > I too have felt this pain, with our upgrade to SRM 5.0 though.
> > One thing I know is that I've never spent that much time with the new
> log.
> >  I click on the log icon, and get the new view, and then hit Control-P
> > which gives me the 'old technical view'.
> > Yes, I've tried various WLC parameter settings, but none of them brings
> me
> > to the technical view, so CTRL-P and I are now good friends (although
> > sometimes it wants to print the log instead).
> >
> > One area where we might have some recourse with SAP is via the ASUG
> > Influence Council, specifically the one taking place this May at the
> ASUG
> > Annual Conference.  The WF/BPM luminaries will be there, and it's an
> > opportunity to help them feel our pain.  Those of you in other
> geographies
> > may have similar 'Influence Councils' in your user groups, and I
> encourage
> > you to make use of them.
> >
> > I don't think it's just a matter of teaching an old dog new tricks, as
> > Mike is a very much younger dog than I.  Perhaps someday we will
> > understand the reasoning behind this 'enhancement'.
> >
> > Glad your mouse has a cord,
> > Sue
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Susan R. Keohan
> > SAP Workflow Specialist
> > MIT Lincoln Laboratory
> > 244 Wood Street, LI-200
> > Lexington, MA.  02420
> > Ph:   781-981-3561
> > Fax: 781-981-1607
> > keohan at LL.MIT.EDU
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
> > Of Mike Pokraka
> > Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 6:35 AM
> > To: sap-wug at mit.edu
> > Subject: ECC Log format (warning: rant)
> >
> > Hello wuggers,
> >
> > Am I the only one who gets the same feeling from the new ECC workflow
> log
> > as sitting in a traffic jam?
> >
> > <rant>
> > I've tried to get used to it for over a year and I think at one point I
> > actually managed to discover a useful feature somewhere (though I've
> > forgotten what it was), but for most part it's just stupid. Yes, stupid.
> > I'm sorry if this upsets some people who have invested significant time
> > into this as it's a fairly complex tool and looks very pretty, but it
> just
> > doesn't cut it in the real world.
> >
> > Let's take looking at a container element for a step in the WF as an
> > example:
> >
> > Old style:
> > 1. Click log icon to display workflow log.
> > 2. Click on container icon next to step in question.
> > 3. See container element of interest.
> > 4. Feel a sense of calm and wellbeing.
> >
> >
> > ECC log:
> > 1. Click log icon to display workflow log
> >
> > 2. Click to expand first fork.
> >
> > 3. See 'Branch 1' 'Branch 2', click on one at random.
> >
> > 4. Resist urge to use foul language in front of client because it's the
> > wrong one.
> >
> > 5. Click to expand other one, realize you need a SECOND click to expand
> > branch itself (what's the point of the 'Branch n' tree level?).
> >
> > 6. Click twice to switch to Chronological view when you realize there
> are
> > more forks further down.
> >
> > 7. Think how nice it would be to sit in a traffic jam on a Friday
> > afternoon.
> >
> > 8. Click to select step of interest.
> >
> > 9. Click on Container tab.
> >
> > 10. Attempt to throw mouse out of window because scroll wheel doesn't
> work
> > in container tab sub-window, which is horizontal and and thus far too
> > small, and all the system elements are of course at the top, blocking
> out
> > the ones you're interested in. Luckily mouse is attached by a cable (at
> > least mine is) and can easily be retrieved.
> >
> > 11. Click several times to scroll down the container list to find the
> one
> > you want.
> > (If it's a mulitline element then clicking it causes it to expand and
> > cover the entire container in a way that is also really annoying, but
> > that's a whole different topic.)
> >
> >
> > Ummm... "New and improved"? Surely someone's been overdoing the happy
> > pills a little?
> > </rant>
> >
> >
> > So, back to my original question: what are our options of pressuring SAP
> > to re-design it or at least in the meantime give us our old log back as
> a
> > *default* option?
> >
> > I can't help thinking one or two development requests are not going to
> cut
> > it, and even if they respond via that route then the thought of waiting
> > two years to see the result in ECC7 is just a bit much.
> >
> > Any opinions?
> > Cheers,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SAP-WUG mailing list
> > SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SAP-WUG mailing list
> > SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug