El 06/04/2010 16:38, Torsten Schoenebaum escribió:
So what approach do you like to use? 1. and 2. may both use a catchall without any hassle.ad 1.: Will be best suited if you need an immediate (and probably automated) response from your system within the workflow. ad 2.: Is fine for the use cases you mentioned and others where user interaction is involved. Have a look at the workitems resource, it's built for stuff like that (especially the 'participant' parameter to the get method might be your friend). Note that in both cases workitem.participant_name will be set to the participant name actually used in the process definition and NOT the one registered to the engine. That way it's very easy to filter by your participants without having to register every one of them within ruote. Anyway, my crystal ball is in maintenance right now. Without knowing what you like to achieve with your 'dynamic' participants, further help won't be possible / will be a pain for you, me and all the others here.
It's some kind of document approval chain with the ability to add roles and workflows in the time, so I can model five roles, map them to participants and build some workflows with them. But in the future, the end-user surely want to add more roles and build new workflows or modify existing ones.
As I'm writing this i think I can model it with a catchall participant; surely I need some advice :-?
Thanks -- you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group. to post : send email to [email protected] to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected] more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
