Difference between revisions of "Workflow Condition Examples"
From SmartWiki
(→Rule #1: Collectively, the conditions on each task should accommodate every possible permutation.) |
|||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Let's discuss each of these rules. | Let's discuss each of these rules. | ||
− | ==Rule #1: Collectively, the conditions on each task | + | ==Rule #1: Collectively, the conditions on each task must accommodate every possible permutation.== |
===Example of Incorrect Configuration=== | ===Example of Incorrect Configuration=== | ||
− | * Three [[types]] exist in a given [[UTA|application]], with [[Determining the typeid| | + | * Three [[types]] exist in a given [[UTA|application]], with [[Determining the typeid|typeIDs]] of 12345, 45678 and 67890. |
* Two connectors are set up on a workflow task with conditions of: | * Two connectors are set up on a workflow task with conditions of: | ||
:* ''"@typeid@"="12345"'' and | :* ''"@typeid@"="12345"'' and | ||
:* ''"@typeid@"="45678"'', respectively | :* ''"@typeid@"="45678"'', respectively | ||
− | * If the workflow is fired against a | + | * If the workflow is fired against a record associated with typeID 67890, the workflow will never progress to the next task. |
− | === | + | ===Examples of Correct Configuration=== |
+ | * As above, three [[types]] exist in a given [[UTA|application]], with [[Determining the typeid|typeIDs]] of 12345, 45678 and 67890. | ||
+ | * Three connectors are set up on a workflow task with conditions of: | ||
+ | :* ''"@typeid@"="12345"'', | ||
+ | :* ''"@typeid@"="45678"'' and | ||
+ | :* ''"@typeid@"="67890"'', respectively | ||
+ | * '''Alternatively''', two connectors with the following conditions could be set up: | ||
+ | :* ''"@typeid@"="12345"'' and | ||
+ | :* ''"@typeid@"!="12345"'' (not equal to "12345"), respectively | ||
+ | |||
+ | * In all cases, when using logical conditions on connectors, the conditions must encompass all possible logical scenarios. | ||
==Rule #2: Each condition should be mutually exclusive from every other.== | ==Rule #2: Each condition should be mutually exclusive from every other.== |
Revision as of 12:04, 16 July 2013
Contents
Page Under Construction
There are two rules that should be followed when adding multiple connectors to a workflow task that incorporate conditional logic statements:
- Collectively, the conditions on each task should accommodate every possible permutation.
- Each condition should be mutually exclusive from every other.
Let's discuss each of these rules.
Rule #1: Collectively, the conditions on each task must accommodate every possible permutation.
Example of Incorrect Configuration
- Three types exist in a given application, with typeIDs of 12345, 45678 and 67890.
- Two connectors are set up on a workflow task with conditions of:
- "@typeid@"="12345" and
- "@typeid@"="45678", respectively
- If the workflow is fired against a record associated with typeID 67890, the workflow will never progress to the next task.
Examples of Correct Configuration
- As above, three types exist in a given application, with typeIDs of 12345, 45678 and 67890.
- Three connectors are set up on a workflow task with conditions of:
- "@typeid@"="12345",
- "@typeid@"="45678" and
- "@typeid@"="67890", respectively
- Alternatively, two connectors with the following conditions could be set up:
- "@typeid@"="12345" and
- "@typeid@"!="12345" (not equal to "12345"), respectively
- In all cases, when using logical conditions on connectors, the conditions must encompass all possible logical scenarios.