Category Archives: Augustus 2007

MRO Workflow causa studio usura MUSCUS, SPD, InfoPath & meaning officia.

Overview

Collatio describit causa studio descriptis actualis MRO (Ut starent, Instaurabo et operationes) workflow approbatione processus perficiatur musco.

Hoc est technica non facto Discussion, sed eidem ministrat prospicere realis-mundi suggestum occurrit exemplum quod ostendit, quomodo musco realis-mundi indigent.

(This entry is cross posted between http://paulgalvin.spaces.live.com et http://blogs.conchango.com)

Background

The client’s MRO process had been characterized by the following

  • Manual approval process.
  • Some support using excel spreadsheets.
  • Irregular approval process. The same MRO purchase approval process would vary day to day, person by person.
  • Lots of paper and hand-written signatures — purchase requisitions required up to 3 written signatures before final approval.

The objectives of this project included:

  • Fully automate the process.
  • Enforce enterprise standards for approval.
  • Provide consolidated view of MRO purchasing to various managers.
  • Detailed audit trail.

As a side effect of the solution, written signatures were no longer required.

Approval Process

The approval process consists of four "swim lanes": Originator, Direct manager, Functional manager and division manager.

Originator:

Sees the need for the purchase and starts the process. Note that the originator may or may not actually enter the purchase requisition, but instead direct another staff member to do so. ALIQUOTIES, the originator does not have the technical expertise to fill out the PO requisition. Verbigratia, a user may want to requisition a new laptop computer, but does not know the best vendor, IT standards, etc. In hoc, the originator works with IT and IT actually fills out the requisition.

Direct manager:

This is the direct manager of the originator (which may be different from the person who actually entered the PO requisition into MOSS). Direct managers must approve the PO requisition before the system seeks approval further down the line.

Functional Manager:

The functional manager is the individual responsible for ensuring that the proposed purchase conforms to enterprise standards within the scope of a particular corporate function. Verbigratia, IT purchases are approved by an IT functional manager.

Division Manager:

Division managers approve purchase requisitions strictly by dollar amount. Division manager approve purchase requisitions in excess of a configurable dollar amount.

The Solution

We used the following tools and components to implement the solution:

MUSCUS: Serves as the platform off which everything else "hangs". MOSS provides bedrock services for security, master data, audit trails and other features.

InfoPath forms services: A MOSS component, this enables users to fill out purchase requisitions via a web browser.

SharePoint amet (SPD): We used SPD to implement the automated workflow process.

Web Service: A c# web service enhances the user experience by enabling cascading selections lists in the InfoPath form and provides better performance with respect to filtering data. Videte hic for a technical deep dive on this subject and our reasons for using it.

Custom Lists: MOSS user profiles provided a given user’s direct manager, but did not provide most of the data that controlled workflow decisions (e.g. whether the divisional manager is required to approve the PO requisition). We used custom lists in an "Enterprise Data" site to maintain data such as "Divisional Manager Approval Dollar Amount", "Functional Area Manager" and so forth. Lists integrated very nicely with InfoPath and also provide create/update/delete (CRUD) functionality with auditing and security out of the box.

Use Case

This use case illustrates how the solution fits together:

  1. Paul wants a new laptop. He describes his needs to Vivek, an IT person familiar with corporate laptop standards, preferred vendors, etc.
  2. Vivek logs into MOSS, accesses the PO Requisition form and enters the requisition on behalf of Paul. The form prompts Vivek for a purchase category which then uses the web services to populate a drop-down list of company-approved vendors. Vivek also specifies the corporate functional area of this purchase (e.g. "IT" or "Finance").
  3. SPD based workflow starts, determines Paul’s direct manager and routes the requisition to his manager, Stacy.
  4. Stacy approves the purchase requisition.
  5. SPD workflow inspects the requisition and determines it’s an IT purchase. It routes the workflow to the IT functional manager, Wonson.
  6. Wonson approves the requisition.
  7. SPD workflow again inspects the requisition and determines that the purchase amount exceeds a maxium dollar amount and routes it to the division manager for approval.
  8. The division manager approves the purchase requisition.

Notes

  • The use case demonstrates a "clean" run with no rejections or jumps.
  • Every approver has the ability to approve or reject the requisition as well as provide written comments. These are logged in the audit trail.
  • If a responsible manager rejects the purchase requisition at any point, the PO requisition is "dead" and the process must be started from the beginning.
  • Workflow notifies the originator at every step of the process.
  • No written signatures — the client determined (after some forceful recommendations) that the audit trail as provided via workflow history, served their auditing needs.
  • Effort — it took approximately three man weeks to implement this solution.

Conclusio

This solution leverages MOSS as a development and run-time platform. The client was able to leverage core MOSS features to automate a routine business process that affected nearly every employee in the company. With the exception of a simple web service (which itself leverages MOSS), almost no actual "programming" was required.

The solution also serves as a "showcase" for the client, demonstrating how different MOSS features can be combined to create a fully featured business application and generate new consulting opportunities in the future.

Glossary

MRO: Ut starent, repair and operations. These purchases typically include items such as notepads, chairs, personal computers, printers, cell phones and the like.

Exem 70-542: Studio commendatione (Microsoft Muneris SharePoint Server 2007 – Applicationem ipsum)

UPDATE: In comments, aliquis missae Donec: http://www.midnightmonkey.co.uk/blog/blogging/?page_id=5. It looks good to me too.

Ego transierunt MUSCUS technica exem hodie, entitled "Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 – Application Development". I found the exam to be pretty rigorous and that it matched up quite well with Microsoft’s praeparatio dux.

Ego fuerit operantes cum MUSCUS in a cotidie basis et nihil verberat actu manus-in experientia enim omnia volutpat.

Quod dixit, I took note of what I was studying as I studied. I believe that all of these resources are helpful, praesertim medium summittendo quod manus-in experientia.

Subiectum Pagina
Excellere ipsum http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms519581.aspx
Quaerere No special recommendation. I had taken a class on search earlier this year and real-world experience carried me through. Work with the "search center" pars MUSCUS.
BDC http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms563661.aspx
Audientiis http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms496822.aspx
Profiles http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms496822.aspx
Contentus Mgmt http://www.sharepointblogs.com/tonstegeman/archive/2007/02/01/moss-custom-policies-part-1-creating-a-custom-information-management-policy.aspx

http://blogs.msdn.com/ecm/archive/2007/03/04/customize-the-page-editing-toolbar-in-moss-2007.aspx

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa674506.aspx

BI Manus-in operando KPI scriptor in MUSCUS.
Workflow http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa830816.aspx
Info mgmt http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb397403.aspx
Variationes http://aspnetcoe.wordpress.com/2007/02/09/customize-variation-root-landing-logic/
Monumentis mgmt http://blogs.msdn.com/recman/archive/2006/06/16/633393.aspx
Infopath http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/06/08/infopath2007/default.aspx

Multis eorum links ad magis links et tendebat ad sequi ad de 3 campester altum.

Omnia dici non recte legitur exem, sed paenitere legere de et etiam si frenos non directe pertinet. BENE bonum effercio scire et fortiter suadeo materia omnes Aspirantes bene rotunda MUSCUS tincidunt.

MUSCUS / WSS Search results (et dataviews): considerandam rudis XML notitia

Haec dicta sint, manifeste cognitum multis, sed dum studet enim meus MUSCUS ipsum programming, Facile intellexi satis est quaerere utrum per ipsam Suspendisse a user interface.

Unus modus est ut sequitur vivos:

  • Obvius Provectus Quaero.
  • Investigationem perage quod reddit aliqua notitia.
  • Duis page (occasus per site).
  • Mutare sequenti p:

<?XML version="1.0" Encoding="utf-VIII"?>
<
p:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform">
<
p:output methodo="XML" version="1.0" Encoding="UTF-VIII" indent="Imo"/>
<
p:Template match="/">
<
pre>
<
p:exemplum ex- elige="*"/>
</
pre>
</
p:Template>
</
p:stylesheet>

  • Appone percute.
  • Nuper mutata in navigatro.

Et nota quod <pre> tag doesn’t do much except serve as a convenient marker when you view the results.

This trick can be very helpful when working with managed properties and customizing search. It will provide a definitive list of the XML available for you to use in your xslt which would have been very helpful the last 25 Search Results Lorem tempora creata sum quidam.

Propter hoc oportet operari tam dataviews, probatur ex eo quod adhuc non licet.

Splendidus retineo visum et Content Management API

Stefan Goßner has put together a terrific 4-part series on the SharePoint Content and Deployment API hic. It offers a great overview and very good examples in code (C #).

I first picked up this link from joris poelmans blog at http://jopx.blogspot.com/.

Etiamsi es similest mei;, in that you have not had to do much hands-on work for content management, this is well worth 20 minutes of your time to read.

Using the API, one can:

  • Export and import content very easily.
  • Re-parent content. If you want to export some content from a site "A" and send it to site "B" but in a totally new place in the hierarchy, this is possible.
  • Export content from a site A and import selected bits into site A.
  • Re-link content (meaning deal with all the hyperlinks).

WSS, doc libs & tabulatum, Ratione columnas involvat [Me]

Someone on the Internets was asking about how to create a calculated column on a list that would show a value formatted as "[User] – [Status] – [Location]" as in "Paul Galvin – Bibentes [libero] Cervisiam – The Beach".

Paul would go in and update his entry in the list and the calculated column would update appropriately. The [User] deficeret ad user introitu / updating album.

A calculated column cannot use "volatile" ut functiones [Me] aut [Hodie]. I solved it in a test environment with these steps:

  1. Create a text column named "Current User".
  2. Pone eius defaltam ad valentiam [Me]
  3. Create a calculated column called "Calc Test".
  4. Pone valor = [User current]

Profectus sum in, Accessit item operatur album.

Mei transierunt 70-315 hodie exem!

I passed the "Developing and Implementing Web Applications with Microsoft Visual C# .NET and Microsoft Visual Studio .NET" exem hodie in magna statu NJ venerabile officia SolarTech in Hasbrouck Heights.

I put this exam up there with BizTalk in terms of difficulty. You can’t fake your way through it.

Studere, I used the the MCAD/MCSD Self Paced Training kit book entitled Developing Web Applications with Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and Visual C# .NET.

Microsoft guidelines (hic) are exactly correct IMO. The book addresses everything and if you have a modicum or real-world experience, it should be a straight-forward exam. If not, take the time get some real world experience or at least execute the labs in the book. That will probably give you what you need.

I even go so far as to recommend the book to pro’s, especially self-taught people like myself. It covers some basic stuff which I just never had a reason to stumble upon in my travels and I’m kicking myself a little bit for never having taken the time to learn them.

SharePoint amet, “Colligere Data a User” et usura illis consequitur.

Use the "Collect Data from User" action to create and assign a task to a user that prompts them for data. Among other things, Ive 'adsuesco assuesco is moveatur a user postulatio approbare vel respuere, et intrant aliquam comments.

Hoc actio fit per modum:

Collect Notitia ex Hic usor (Output INCERTUS: collect1)

Clicking Notitia ubi alternis sermonibus boxes quod dat speciem trahit series et user notitia, cum daret et munus expletum Hic usor Patet.

Pars output (INCERTUS: collect1) saves the ID of the task. You use this in your workflow to extract the user’s actual response via the "Compare any data source" condition.

Quod ostendit condicionis

Si agrum Pares valor

Click agrum et tunc F(x) icon and it pulls up another dialog box. Use this generalized dialog box to to tell SPD two things;

1. What is the list and column whose value you want to compare.

2. Quomodo workflow engine locant speciei in hoc versu album?

Hoc facere:

  1. Change the "Source" dropdown to point at the correct task list. Note that the dialog box expands to show a "Find the List Item" sectio.
  2. Details Lookup in agro tellus, lego nomen agrum placet, quorum valor (Maps ad hoc quod in collecta dicitur notitia alternis buxum desursum).
  3. In the "Find the List Item" sectio, select "Tasks:ID" in Agro tellus.
  4. In pretio agri, click in F(x). This opens yet another dialog box.
  5. Change the source "Workflow Data"
  6. Select the workflow variable that matches to the "Output to Variable" Colligere notitia ab actione.
  7. Click OK / 'perfectus quod vos OK.

Is vultus amo, hoc mihi:

imaginem

Ad hoc, Iam vos can utor quod in aestimatione tua, sicut requiritur workflow.

Nota addito:

Ut breviter declinavit, I always create an appropriately named workflow variable of type "List Item ID" and use that instead of the auto-generated "collect1".

This "compare any data source" alternis sermonibus posuit in pluribus locis dicitur in SPD et dominatus est puteus dignitas.

Finem ==

Technorati Tags:

Intermittendi IE cum accessu ad fragosus in documentis WSS / library MUSCUS document

Nam hoc fui flagellatus 9 et vidi in mensibus populum et MSDN Usenet forums eam too.l

Aliquando, Cum accessu ad verbum document (aut alia genera doc) ex scripti simpliciter in bibliotheca facit Penitus Rimor 'fragosus et recedam (si aperta sunt cum eo assumptis universis tabs).

Hotfix potest solvere hoc MS: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938888

Quoque, illic 'nonnullus forsit description de hic:

http://jopx.blogspot.com/2007/07/solving-internet-explorer-crash-when.html

Velle verum gradum XPath?

Overview:

Procurat quod a quibusdam ratio contenti elenchum creavit consuetudo duodecim columnis.

Addita ad paginam deinde per SPD, convertatur in ipsum secundum.

Forsit:

My Xpath expression was returning blank for a column named "Current Position". I referenced it thusly:

    <table border="1">
      <p:for-each select="/dsQueryResponse/Rows/Row" >
        <tr>
          <td>
            Current Status:
            <p:value-of select="@Current_x0020_Status"></p:valor ex->
          </td>
        </tr>
      </p>
    </mensamque>

The column in the CT is named "Current Status". It shows up in the lookup as "Current Status". Everywhere you look, you see "Current Status".

While thrashing madly about, looking for a solution, I instead referred to "@Recruiter" and behold! — that actually returned back the current status. I expected it to return back the recruiter when I did that.

Solutio:

I poked about in SPD. Go to that page in SPD and it shows the data view. You can inspect the actual data provided to the view and associated Xpath. Here I found out that indeed, the Xpath pointed at "Recruiter". Strangely enough, the "actual" recruiter field pointed from "Recruiter1".

Take Away:

SPD provides authoritative Xpath expressions for rows & columns in a data view.

Secundo, it shows the actual data. So for example, a column of type shows this:

<nobr><span><A HREF="/sites/Corporate/HumanResources/TalentAcquisition/_layouts/userdisp.aspx?ID=17">Galvin, Paulus</A><img terminus ="0" height="1" width="3" src="/_layouts/images/blank.gif"/><a href=’javascript:’ onclick=’IMNImageOnClick();return false;’ class=’ms-imnlink’><img name=’imnmark’ title=” border =’0′ height=’12’ width=’12’ src=’/_layouts/images/blank.gif’ alt=’No presence information’ sip=’PGalvin@xxx.com’ id=’imn_77,type=smtp’/></a></span></nobr>