-------> We are bypassing the SR for a couple of requirements and build AIF forms. We will be building direct forms in some mcases and wanted to know if surveys can be generated off of a direct custom form.
I am assuming that you have generated URL using the Context URL builder to open the Request Entry Console in context. Even in that case, you would need a SRD where you can build survey. Thanks Mahesh On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Kathy Morris <[email protected]>wrote: > ** ** > We are bypassing the SR for a couple of requirements and build AIF forms. > We will be building direct forms in some mcases and wanted to know if > surveys can be generated off of a direct custom form. > > As far as Work Orders, there is a 1 to 1 relationship with work orders in > some cases. In other cases there is a 1 to many relationship with WO. I > know surveys are generated off of the SR. I was wondering if we can build > surveys to be created off of multiple work orders also (this is not an issue > when there is 1 SR and 1 work order). > > > In a message dated 8/11/2011 11:04:43 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > ** **************** > > I seriously wonder sometimes how much real world beta testing BMC does with > their clients prior to finalizing the form designs.**** > > ** ** > > Regards,**** > > **** > > *Andrew Goodall***** > > Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com > <http://www.jcp.com/> > **** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Stroud, Natalie K > *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2011 12:58 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Request Console vs. Direct Entry > **** > > ** ** > > Amen, Claire!**** > > ** ** > > We just rolled out with ITSM 7.6.04 about 2 weeks ago and we decided to go > with the Best Practice view precisely because the Classic view is being > deprecated. Our service desk analysts are already complaining that their > hands hurt because of all the extra clicking.**** > > ** ** > > As far as our users are concerned, they don’t care how nice and pretty and > “clean” the screen looks – they want to be able to get to the information > they need in the most efficient manner possible even if it means their > screen looks a bit cluttered.**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *Natalie Stroud* > **Remedy** Tester > Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), > contractor to Sandia National Labs > ****Albuquerque**, **NM**** > (505)844-7983 > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>>**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Sanford, Claire > *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:45 AM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Request Console vs. Direct Entry**** > > ** ** > > ** **** > > I was going to ask the same question.**** > > **** > > My reason is that my Support center staff do not need to see open > tickets. They put in about 90 tickets per day per person. They have to > put a ticket in for every call. If they have to do all that extra clicking, > it takes time. I hate the fact that the Classic View forms are being > deprecated. For people working the tickets, the "best" practice view may be > fine, but for entering a ticket and quickly verifying the info, it is not > quick or easy.**** > > **** > > So, if my staff just open the form up and create a ticket without going > through the click here, click here and finally click here process... will > they lose any functionality? **** > > **** > > I think the designers of the views should have spent a day in a busy > support center. **** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Chowdhury, Tauf > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:58 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Request Console vs. Direct Entry > **** > > ** **** > > Are you talking about the OOB requester console that comes with Service > Desk or the Service Request Management module? Either way, there is some > functionality lost such as being able to see the "Open tickets" table. It > all depends on what the requirement is. If all your users want to do is > enter a request and forget about it, then having a "direct entry form" as > you call it should be fine. Anything else, go with the requester console. > > I guess the question is... why don't you want to use the OOB entry form and > why do you want to use the direct entry form? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) on behalf of Kathy > Morris > Sent: Wed 8/10/2011 5:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: SRM: Request Console vs. Direct Entry > > Hi, > > If we enter the request via a direct entry form versus the request console, > what functionality do I lose? > > Am I able to redirect surveys to the direct entry form or the work order > form? > > Thanks. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" > **** > > ------------------------------ > > This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest Laboratories, Inc. > proprietary information that is privileged, confidential or subject to > copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. This e-mail is intended > solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If > you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, or the employee or agent > responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, you are > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or action > taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is > strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in > error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the > original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ **** > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ **** > > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and > may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the reader of this > message is not the intended > recipient, you are hereby notified that your access is unauthorized, and > any review, dissemination, > distribution or copying of this message including any attachments is > strictly prohibited. If you are not > the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the material > from any computer. > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend > WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
