Archiving issues-proposals NOT NOW

1

Hello Peter,

the main idea behind the archiving mechanisms is to help efficiently manage instances that are no longer actively used but need to be stored. For instance, in many countries, legal documents need to be kept despite the fact they are no longer in use.
Archiving mechanisms also help with keeping the main content database fairly lean.

Therefore, by design, once you archive elements, it's impossible to interact with them as you'd normally do and we plan to keep it that way (the ability to tinker with archived data is undesirable by most organizations).

With that said, I see 2 possible solutions to the cases you brought up:
1. [If you do not need to move workflow instances from your main content database] Make sure your process ends with a final "Archive" step. Then you can freely assign field visibility and permissions.
2. [If you do need to move instances from your main content database] Move the workflow instances to the separate process that would be used specifically for archiving purposes with elevated visibility and permissions options.

I also encourage you to contact our experts via https://support.webcon.com as they might have more ideas and will be able to provide you with more detailed solutions.

Hi Michal,

Thanks for your respond!
I understand concept of archiving in Webcon, I know that interaction is not possible.
What I am saying (point 2.) that after archiving, we loose read only privileges which were granted on instance level based on an attribute. This way we cannot control which archived instances should be visible for a group/user.
The other thing I mentioned (point 1.) , that today we do not have any control over form field visibility in archived instances, which imho would be useful.

Yes, we had the idea to keep these intances in Archived step or move to an other simpler workflow, but this way we would loose the main purpose to free up some storage space in active content db.

So a solution for at least to our privilege problem with archiving would be appreciated!

Hi Peter, archiving mechanisms were by design built this way to make them straightforward to use and simple to maintain in the product. At this point, we do not plan to extend their capabilities. On the other hand, since we can create multiple databases for processes (keep in mind we can store metadata and attachments separately), I think there should be sufficient options to manage storage efficiently. I'm sure our infrastructure experts will be able to suggest solutions accordingly.