nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Workflow Modeler 7.3.2 - Migrating workflows from 7.2.1

System

First off, I am in the basement of **** after re-organizing my first workflow after installing TS 7.3.2. After my eyes adjusted to the maze of lines, arrows and boxes all on top of each other, I managed to separate all the nonsense and get the model looking valid. Emphasis on "looking". So I validate the thing and fix the errors involving flows not being stuck properly to a task. And what's left is one pesky error that for the life of me I can't figure out. And in true Interwoven fashion, the error makes absolutely no sense.

It's telling me my entire Workflow Model is invalid (Element = Workflow Model). And the problem is this little gem:

Fatal error, the model is not valid!cvc-complex-type.4:Attribute 'from' must appear on element 'Flow'

I'm ready to throw the monitor out the window. Anyone have a clue what that means? The same exact model validates fine in 7.2.1.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Adam Stoller

Try saving the WFM to disk and looking at the actual IPM and JSON code - it might be easier to spot the problem that way...

Migrateduser

Try saving the WFM to disk and looking at the actual IPM and JSON code - it might be easier to spot the problem that way...

Thanks for this suggestion - it actually helped me solve the problem. The JSON file - I'm not sure yet what use this is to me. But the IPM XML was extremely helpful. Evidently every Flow has a "from" and "to" attribute, but these only appear in the raw XML - they don't appear in the Properties pane when you click on a transition line. This is something they should show, I think, in the GUI. Also, the error is extremely cryptic - there were 3 Flows that were missing those attributes, so I just recreated the transitions and it fixed itself. Had there been a single error for each offending Flow, I would have been able to detect where the problem was a lot faster.

My biggest pain point so far with this new WFM is that all my models initially appear squished and all the elements (tasks and transition lines) are on top of each other. It's going to be a tedious process to make them look organized and readable. Plus it seems the canvas is fixed - I can't just drag a task over to the edge of the canvas and it extends itself. So I have to become more of an artist to get larger models to look decent and allow someone else to follow the flow easily.

Maybe there are ways to resolve these - I just started with this version.

Thanks for the help, Adam - that was extremely helpful.

nipper

My biggest pain point so far with this new WFM is that all my models initially appear squished and all the elements (tasks and transition lines) are on top of each other. It's going to be a tedious process to make them look organized and readable. Plus it seems the canvas is fixed - I can't just drag a task over to the edge of the canvas and it extends itself. So I have to become more of an artist to get larger models to look decent and allow someone else to follow the flow easily.

FYI, I think the new UI is much better than the Win32 app. However it works 100 times better on FF than on IE, so use that.

Picturing Smitty as an artist. Not a pretty site.

Migrateduser

It's like a car crash - you can't look away even though you know you should.

I will probably like it better as well, but we have a few larger workflows that will take some time to pretty up in the new UI. Just need to get used to it. Would be nice to have a button that formats everything for you, but this is Interwoven we're talking about. I can dream...

birt_doc.rptdesign

request.txt

Adam Stoller

I seem to recall that you can increase the size of the canvas - if I recall you hover near the middle of an edge and you get an arrow you can click on.

FanTom

Hello,
While you guys are on the topic, may be you can help.
Looked into the JSON for first time, working on TS7.3.1 on Sol 10.
Wanted to see if at all the External tasks in WFM's will be able to invoke a PERL script with arguments? Or should it be done through a URL task?

Thanks,

Chart1 (1).rptdesign

nipper

Hello,
While you guys are on the topic, may be you can help.
Looked into the JSON for first time, working on TS7.3.1 on Sol 10.
Wanted to see if at all the External tasks in WFM's will be able to invoke a PERL script with arguments? Or should it be done through a URL task?

Thanks,

If you ask can I put a Perl script in an external task, yes. It behaves as before, so your script should require little to no modifications.

Migrateduser

I seem to recall that you can increase the size of the canvas - if I recall you hover near the middle of an edge and you get an arrow you can click on.

Yes I can make the canvas fill up more of the screen, but I can't seem to slide the tasks over beyond a hard edge. You'd think I could expand the edge out if I attempt to push a task beyond it, but it won't budge.

Adam Stoller

Yes I can make the canvas fill up more of the screen, but I can't seem to slide the tasks over beyond a hard edge. You'd think I could expand the edge out if I attempt to push a task beyond it, but it won't budge.

I agree, it should dynamically grow the canvas when you move a task beyond the edge, but I don't think (as you indicate) that it does - instead you have to grow the canvas first, and then you can move the tasks to the edge of the newly sized canvas (at least that's what I recall, I don't have 7.3x running right now)

Rick Poulin

Would be nice to have a button that formats everything for you, but this is Interwoven we're talking about. I can dream...

That's never going to happen. Unless you can make some assumptions about what the models look like, rendering 'the most legible' graph of a flow is an NP-complete problem. The best you can do is an approximation based on predefined heuristics, and it's very difficult to define heuristics that apply to all cases. And even if you could, this is pretty complex computer science so I'd sooner have them spend their time fixing **** that needs fixing Smiley Happy

Source: wrote a thesis on the topic a few years ago, using a sampling of real-world workflows from past projects.

Migrateduser

That's never going to happen. Unless you can make some assumptions about what the models look like, rendering 'the most legible' graph of a flow is an NP-complete problem. The best you can do is an approximation based on predefined heuristics, and it's very difficult to define heuristics that apply to all cases. And even if you could, this is pretty complex computer science so I'd sooner have them spend their time fixing **** that needs fixing

Source: wrote a thesis on the topic a few years ago, using a sampling of real-world workflows from past projects.

I realize it won't happen. **** they can't even get the exact same workflow to validate properly in 7.3.2 that is valid in 7.2.1.

Rick Poulin

I realize it won't happen.

Oh I know you know that. I'm just saying that of all the things that won't happen, this is the one that's not happening in any universe / time line.

/picturing an engineer somewhere going "oh yeah? well I'll show you, random guy on the interwebs!"

Migrateduser

More WFM migration problems. Any workflow that has a ReviewTask is not validating properly after migrating from 7.2.1 to 7.3.2. Even if you can get past that by faking it out, the workflows are not instantiating. Working with Support....I should have my own direct line at this point.

ShashankJain

I Agree, it took lot of time for me to debug the same error.

They should give more clarity while throwing the error.