search results

(...) ld like to have open 2 windows separately [now I open 2x Design Studio, where 1st is for editing, 2nd if for "to see more ... " So I would like to have option to: - simply open window with graf (paths and steps) in separate window - open source windows in separate window (no I need to print screen paste to mspain/irfanview) then do to configuration od field function ect. [I don't believe that no (...)

(...) tion takes place for each field of the type: Choice field, regardless of whether 'Attribute validation' is selected on the path or not. I need advice on how to get around this problem in the case of paths such as: Reject, Reverse, where these fields contain random data, e.g. set via OCR - without any intervention in the fields by the user. Regards

(...) 'm not sure if this is something that changed in the versions or I'm missing any configuration. I checked that users with the access 'Access and Edit all Instances' are allowed to select Available paths even if they're not the assigned person. I know that although having the rights to edit the instances, it couldn't be moved and that yellow message was shown because another person was the assignee. (...)

(...) one of Lider (group) then he need to fill and set proper values in each row in "item list". if user is one of User Group then he don't need to do anything or is filling first part of "item list" paths : if Path Zapisz (save) >> resets [cancel all and assign again] all done tasks and all need to do task (step) again if path "ocena raportu" (next step) then all need to finish step .. [when wa (...)

(...) ther: 1) Allow the selection of existing reports as a data source 2) Define the view in the report tile configuration I would prefer the first option so that we can still use mass actions, quick paths and the like. Btw. does anyone use report tiles without a link? If I see a number I want to go to page where I can see the details. Best regards, Daniel

(...) the above-mentioned BPS data source. 4. There is automation in the operator that starts a new cycle (Start a subworkflow). I have 4 actions here because when I start a new element, I use 4 different paths . This is due to the fact that sometimes I assign a task to one person, and sometimes to two people per company. 5. In the data tab, I indicate the collection columns on the basis of which I complete (...)

(...) = DicActionKinds.TypeID join DicActionTypes on ACT_ActionTypeID = DicActionTypes.TypeID left join WorkFlows on ACT_WFID = WF_ID left join WFSteps on ACT_STPID = STP_ID left join WFAvaiblepaths on ACT_PATHID = PATH_ID left join WFPlugIns on PLU_ID = ACT_PLUID left join Automations as actionDefinitionAutomation on actionDefinition.ACT_AUTMID = actionDefinitionAutomation.AUTM_ID lef (...)

(...) be found) i have that prevent me from moving to the next step(in one case i would maybe like to "cancel" the subworkflow/return with negative). I tried to deactivate the form field validation on the paths , however the error still occurs.

(...) col (word>>pdf) of acceptance So i would like to have 3 columns: 1) person 2) behalf (if was) 3) time step at the moment I'm struggle with filtration .... skip save or other than end step paths ... in green lat 2 - the "steps" where I clicked - finish ..live the step ... where I have 1 person and no waiting for other to finish - it was easy .. but if in step I have assigned 2-3 peopl (...)

(...) Hi, it would be nice having a global default button style template configuration for the button style of paths in the parameters tab. We would like to define some styles like "decline", "approve". This way all negative or positive buttons would always have the same look and everything could be controled through the global style template in system settings. In the path parameter configuration a li (...)

(...) Hello, I have a process, in which the "pathId" transition paths require adding comment. However, in SDK I am unable to find a way to move the document along this path due to missing comment. private async Task CancelInstance(DocumentsManager manager, int documentId, int pathId) { ___var document = await manager.GetDocumentByIdAsync(documentId); ___await document.Comment.AddCommentAsync("Adding c (...)

(...) udio (can’t recall exactly where) to view a workflow diagram—similar to the Workflow Designer view—that showed how many times each path was used. I used this feature during testing to verify that all paths were covered and to check the number of executions. Does anyone know where this functionality can be found in version 2025.1.1, or if it has been removed? Thanks for your help!

(...) fits - Prevents accidental progress on incorrect or incomplete data. - Simplifies corrections without having to cancel or rebuild workflows. - Reduces the need for custom “On Hold” steps, global paths , or path-rule maintenance. - Improves user experience and administrative control in complex workflows.

(...) true - The other path marks the field as not required instead It would be great, if the value of the form field validation would be available in the SDK so that we can modify the code and not all paths where this is used. This behavior applies to 2025 R1 and R2. I have no chance to look into it,, but I think the "IsRequired" property was set to false in older versions.

(...) t generated. By the way my dropdown in WEBCON BPS SDK Tools Chat I dont have anything(image 1 ) Could you please advise what prerequisites or configuration should be checked (Node.js version, npm, paths , permissions, etc.) or what could cause this issue? Best regards, Androsh

(...) lly, opening a historical version would launch a separate dialogue with a read-only version of the workflow designer. In this mode, users could: - see the full workflow diagram - inspect steps and paths - review configuration settings of elements - analyze parameters and logic used in that version This would allow devs to fully review previous configurations even after many subsequent changes hav (...)

(...) fficient I suggest to mark such a path to an intermediate step e.g. with a red exclamation mark in the beginning/middle/end of the path. A warning could even prevent saving the process until all such paths have a task assignment. This is already done e.g. when an advanced configuration has not been entered after adding a choice form field. Kind regards Sébastien

(...) > Timer throws an error: field validation "Comment" on path "cancel". 1. idea: I make a special cancel-path for the timer => problems: * I have more such steps => would result in many workaround paths * Some cancel path do have flow-control behind, to determine the correct final step 2. Idea: I disable "comment required" in that path and create a form-rule which checks if the user is a real u (...)