<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Defining Workflow Process Properties</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/</link>
	<description>Technical advice, help and instruction with Siebel Systems</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 02:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: stuandgravy</title>
		<link>http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>stuandgravy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 02:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/#comment-97</guid>
		<description>Great point, Mike, thanks for the info.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great point, Mike, thanks for the info.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike M. Lin</title>
		<link>http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/#comment-92</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike M. Lin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:46:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/#comment-92</guid>
		<description>A couple caveats about data types of process properties:

1) Always using 'String' can lead to undesired results when using comparison operators like 'less than' or 'greater than' (think: alphabetical vs. numeric comparisons) - which you probably already knew.

2) Here's something you might not have known...  If you correct any existing processes that have the wrong data type defined, you must delete and recreate any decision branches that refer to those properties.  The reason is that the decision branches themselves store process property criteria differently depending on the data type.  This is evident from the database schema or the xml schema of a workflow export.

Be careful out there, because It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A couple caveats about data types of process properties:</p>
<p>1) Always using &#8216;String&#8217; can lead to undesired results when using comparison operators like &#8216;less than&#8217; or &#8216;greater than&#8217; (think: alphabetical vs. numeric comparisons) - which you probably already knew.</p>
<p>2) Here&#8217;s something you might not have known&#8230;  If you correct any existing processes that have the wrong data type defined, you must delete and recreate any decision branches that refer to those properties.  The reason is that the decision branches themselves store process property criteria differently depending on the data type.  This is evident from the database schema or the xml schema of a workflow export.</p>
<p>Be careful out there, because It&#8217;s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graham</title>
		<link>http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.notesonsiebel.com/2008/03/03/defining-workflow-process-properties/#comment-80</guid>
		<description>Well the &lt;em&gt;In, In/Out, Out&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;None&lt;/em&gt; flags are really only used "in anger" when defininf web services as this is what the wizard looks at when defining the WSDL.

So if you look at a Siebel web service and think there's a bunch of arguments that are in there that shouldn't be exposed, that's because the developer hasn't understood, or has been to lazy, to set these appropriately. conversely, if something is missing, that's the first lace to look!

As the industry as a whole, and Siebel in particular is moving towards "web services for everything" it should be a best practice for these parameters to be set correctly for &lt;b&gt;every&lt;/b&gt; workflow process, otherwise you're storing up problems for the future! The argument "we don't need it now so I'm not doing it doesn't wash with me... that's laziness talking".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well the <em>In, In/Out, Out</em> and <em>None</em> flags are really only used &#8220;in anger&#8221; when defininf web services as this is what the wizard looks at when defining the WSDL.</p>
<p>So if you look at a Siebel web service and think there&#8217;s a bunch of arguments that are in there that shouldn&#8217;t be exposed, that&#8217;s because the developer hasn&#8217;t understood, or has been to lazy, to set these appropriately. conversely, if something is missing, that&#8217;s the first lace to look!</p>
<p>As the industry as a whole, and Siebel in particular is moving towards &#8220;web services for everything&#8221; it should be a best practice for these parameters to be set correctly for <b>every</b> workflow process, otherwise you&#8217;re storing up problems for the future! The argument &#8220;we don&#8217;t need it now so I&#8217;m not doing it doesn&#8217;t wash with me&#8230; that&#8217;s laziness talking&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
