I wrote up a detailed article a few weeks ago describing how to create a SharePoint Designer workflow that sends a task reminder email on a daily basis. It’s been edidit in novum SharePoint Latin site. More generally, articulum ostendit quam creare a looping structura in SPD.

In emporium habet a varietate articulos possidet, inter alia, ipsa technica effercio, interviews and industry news. I recommend you add it to your RSS feed.

Si opus ministerii vel vendere, I’d also consider advertising on the site. It’s off to a strong start with several thousand pairs of eyes looking at it already. That’s sure to grow.

Denique, si iam prurigo scribere aliquid et posside eam in fronte maioris audientibus, this is a great time and place to scratch it.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Marcam Miller super ad Finem User SharePoint has posted my latest article about using SharePoint Designer to create great workflow solutions up on his site. Reprehendo eam.

In hoc articulo, Ego loqui de consilio processus et, in maior detail, quam ad posuit certa et iterabilem test processus usura SharePoint features (consuetudinem tabulatum, site templates). The article targets End Users, sed accessus bonum tincidunt quoque.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Ultima septimana, Eram opus sicco quam ansam veniat et implement a statu apparatus et dixi metienda usura SharePoint, ut seorsum, quod fortasse scribere blog post melius de workflow logging.

Bene, Sanjeev Rajput beat me to it. Spectemus.

Salvis stipes in morem notitia usura album videtur superior regularis history workflow:

• Suus iustus a consuetudine album, sic vos can patefacio quod excellere facillime.
• Te potest creare views, spurcamen notitia vitaliter, etc.
• Suus non subduntur auto-expurget cum vos adepto ordinarius workflow history.

Sunt pericula / downsides:

• Multi currebant cum workflows logging multum nimis notitia scribi possent numero.
• Maybe you *do* want automatic purging. You don’t get that feature with this approach (sine coding).
• Security is tricky. In order to write to the list, the user must have permission to do so. That means that it’s probably not suitable for any kind of "official" audit since the user could discover the list and edit it. This could be overcome with some custom programming.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

This past week I finished off a proof of concept project for a client in Manhattan. While implementing the solution, Cucúrri in defectu alterius musco KPIs (hic enim et meum exitum priore KPI Workaround).

Background: We used SharePoint Designer workflow to model a fairly complex multi-month long business process. As it chugged along, it would update some state information in a list. KPIs use this data to do their mojo.

We decided to create a new site each time a new one of these business processes kicks off. Aside from the workflow itself, these sites host several document libraries, use audience targeting and so forth. Just a bunch of stuff to help with collaboration among the internal employees, traveling employees and the client’s participating business partners.

We also wanted to show some KPIs that monitor the overall health of that specific business process as promoted by the workflow state data and viewed using the KPIs.

Tandem, we used KPI list items that do a count on a view on a list in the site (as opposed to pulling from another data source, like excel or SQL).

The Problem: As you can imagine, assuming we were to carry the basic idea forward into a production world, we would want a site template. Provision a new site based off a "business process" Template.

The problem is that you can’t seem to get a functioning KPI that way. When I create a new site based on a template with a KPI List and KPI web part, the new site’s KPI data are broken. The new site’s KPI list points at whatever source you defined when you first saved it as a template.

By way of example:

• Create a new site and build it to perfection. This site includes the KPI data.
• Save that as a template.
• Create a new site and base if off the template.
• This new site’s KPI list items’ sources point to the site template, not the current site.

The instantiation process does not correct the URL.

I tried to solve this by specifying a relative URL when defining the KPI list item. Autem, I couldn’t get any variation of that to work.

I always want to pair up these "problem" blog posts with some kind of solution, but in this case I don’t have a good one. The best I can figure is that you need to go in to the newly provisioned site and fix everything manually. The UI makes this even harder because changing the URL of the source list causes a refresh, so you really have to redefine the whole thing from scratch.

If anyone knows a better way to handle this, placere stipes a comment.

</finem>

I’ve recently learned that it’s possible and even fairly easy to create a state machine workflow using SharePoint Designer. Necessity is the mother of invention and all that good stuff and I had a need this week that looked for an invention. Coincidentally, I came across this MSDN forum post tam. My personal experience this week and that "independent confirmation" lends strength to my conviction. I plan to write about this at greater length with a full blown example, but here’s the gist of it:

• The approach leverages the fact that a workflow can change a list item, thereby triggering a new workflow. I’ve normally considered this to be a nuisance and even blogged about using semaphores to handle it.
• SharePoint allows multiple independent workflows to be active against a specific list item.

To configure it:

• Design your state machine (i.e., the states and how states transition from one to the next).
• Implement each state as separate workflow.
• Configure each of these state workflows to execute in response to any change in the list item.

Each state workflow follows this rough pattern:

• Upon initialization, determine whether it should really run by inspecting state information in the "current item". Abort if not.
• Do the work.
• Update the "current item" with new state information. This triggers an update to the current item and fires off all the state workflows.

Aside from the obvious benefit that one can create a declarative state machine workflow, all that state information is terrific for building KPIs and interesting views.

It does have a fairly substantial drawback — standard workflow history tracking is even more useless than normal 🙂 That’s easily remedied, autem. Store all of your audit type information in a custom list. That’s probably a good idea even for vanilla sequential workflow, but that’s for another blog post 🙂

I call this a "mea culpa" because I have, infeliciter, said more than once on forums and elsewhere that one must use visual studio to create a state machine workflow. That simply isn’t true.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

It’s possible to cause an endless loop in a SharePoint Designer workflow. A common implementation pattern like this causes the problem:

• Partum a workflow, et se associant album.
• Indicant quod incipere debet in Partum a novus items et items existendi update.
• A step in the workflow updates a field in "Current Item".
• Cum current item mutata, incipiat de novo workflow.

Prohibet infinitas ansa, peragendam simplex semaphore:

• Adde situs agmen (aut agmine album / library genera contentus, si non es usura).
• Abscondas a edit page (factu, si locus agmen via proprietatum, ut facile, si non agmine album).
• In workflow, reprehendo, si valor semaphore agmen blank.
• Si est blank, et posuit illud non valet Dilígite procedere.
• Si est, non est blank, Statim exitus.

Hoc potest fieri solutio satis nuanced, pendentium, et huiusmodi negotium requisita, sed cum Ive 'been opus illud exemplar a operabilium.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Quam multa sciunt, Aliquam molestie pharetra dummodo per Microsoft hie secundum hos gradus est cimex quod potest reproducere:

• Mauris class cum Max moli 10 alumni.
• Register –> Total available seats properly decrements by one. Result: 9 praesto cathedras.
• Unregister: –> Bug. Total available seats should increment by one. It does not. Result: 9 praesto sedibus per SharePoint, sed in eo,, Sunt 10 praesto cathedras.

Solutio: Uti SharePoint Designer corrigere workflow.

Primum, open up the site. The folder list for me looks like this:

If we have a look at the "Attendee registration" workflow, we see that there is a step labeled "Enforce seating policy". It looks like this:

This step in the workflow updates the item by incrementing the "Filled Seats" metadata column on the course. If we pull that up in more detail, videmus:

Quod suus omnes notitia postulo fige unregistration workflow.

Si workflow flip super ut unregistration, there is no similar workflow step. Add it as follows:

1: Expand "Attendee unregistration" et aperire XOML (vide prius si screen iecit errabis).

2: Addunt novam variabilem workflow, "New Filled Seats" of type "Number".

3: Assign a value to "New Filled Seats" ut ostensum:

4: Pleni sedes ad decrementum 1:

5: Cursus eget augue, relatus:

6: Make sure all the steps are in the right sequence. Enim me, is vultus amo is:

7: Consummetur workflow iterum aedificare illud.

8: Test.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Unus de emergentes exemplaria invenio in innectis SharePoint solutiones leverages SharePoint Designer workflow, et opus Receptorem.

Hic est a negotio missionis ponerent in context:

• Ego upload a tabellae ut a doc lib.
• Ego calcitrare off multi-step usura workflow creavit SharePoint Designer.
• Ad punctum in quod processus, workflow assignat officium alicui (per colligere notitia de user negotium vel assignare).
• We want to use a KPI to track how long that task is awaiting completion. The KPI shows green for tasks that are completed or due more than 3 days from now. It shows yellow if the task is due tomorrow or today. It shows red if the task is past due.
• Hic 'CALCITRO: Volo diem festum esse qui pellit quod KPI-Conscius.

I can’t calculate a holiday-aware due date in SharePoint Designer workflow very easily. I would have to create a custom action or use a 3rd party tool. Autem, it’s easy enough to calculate such a date in an event receiver. Merge those two together and we get a pattern like this:

• Define a hidden yes/no site column on the document library labeled "DoCalcualteDueDate".
• Ut falsum illud Initialize.
• In tempore opportuno workflow (e.g. just before the "collect data" Actio), quod ad verum valorem assignaret.
• An ItemUpdate() event receiver looks to see if "DoCalculateDueDate" is true. Since the event receiver runs on every update, "DoCalculateDueDate" falsum est normaliter.
• Cum workflow assignat veram DoCalculateDueDate, Receptorem Supputat eventus feriae-date debitum conscia.
• Ubi ad rem facit accipientis Calculo, Nuntium ad hoc ponit falsam DoCalculateDueDate.

In finem, SPD workflow is communicated with an event receiver via the DoCalculateDueDate semaphore and we have holiday-aware due dates that are assigned at the exactly correct moment in the workflow’s life. SharePoint Designer controls when the due date is assigned but the event receiver performs the actual calculation and assignment.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

UPDATE: I’ve been researching how to embed a SPD workflow into a site definition. Haec forum MSDN catenam notitia aliqua interesting. It’s not conclusive, sed puncta ad viam per truncatis.

I’m giving this post a slightly oddball "Observed Behavior" lead since I’m a little leery of drawing conclusions from it. SPD workflows are … temperamental.

Populus saepe interrogat / Mirantes / fretting over moving SPD workflows from one place to another. Hodie, Et ego post hos gradus facti, haec observamus:

• Workflow creata sum usura a SharePoint Designer in situ attachiatus ad documentum bibliotheca.
• Bibliothecam jam socius tabellae est tere pluribus documenta.
• Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, ut servatum a me.
• Cum ego, ut salvos situm template, Tam contentus sim salvus.
• Ego novum situ in eodem collection site usura id template.

Ad hoc, I tried to run the workflow. It promptly terminated itself with the log message, "Failed on start".

I expected this. I have low expectations when it comes to moving SPD workflows around.

Dixique:

• Aperuit in situ SharePoint Designer.
• Had a peek at the workflow. It seemed fine.
• I clicked "Finish".
• Cucúrri in workflow.

Hoc tempore, id operato simila.

I’ll add that this workflow used the "collect data from user" Sed actio quae est multiplex secundum actionem sub cucullo.

I tentatively conclude that the process of "finishing" the workflow caused SPD to properly associate the SPD workflow with the new document library. I also conclude the XOML and other XML artifacts are reasonably "loose". They are not super tightly coupled to the document library.

Quid hoc? Assuming it’s a reliable and reproducible process, there’s at least one rough method we can use to move them around. I don’t know if this would work if we crossed site collection boundaries or even more drastically, Novus omnis firmis (e.g. Dev ad scaenam FODICO).

Si hoc legere scis inclinatus, consectetur adipiscing elit velit vel email me your SharePoint Designer migration story. I’ll gladly update this posting with any insights thus offered.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

It’s often useful to store status information in a custom list such as an approval code which should never be directly manipulated by end users. This is a common business scenario. I have been working on a project this year that generates various status and reminder dates via SharePoint Designer workflows that then drive KPIs and generally support time-critical business processes.

Uti typus euismod / agmine consequi effectum.

Partum a situ contentus cum status column type ut ostensum:

Note the "Status (nam Demo)" agro ad imum.

Postero, click on the column name to access the column’s properties. Select "Hidden (Non apparent in formis,)" Column Occasus ut ostendo in sectione:

This removes the field from the standard edit/update forms. Autem, tamen est available in views, KPIs, et id quod alibi uti velis, including SPD workflow.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.