0

Standard vs. Multi-doc WF Task Metadata Consistency

With the introduction of multi-doc workflows, we noticed how the multi-doc task data is, in some cases, stored in different fields than standard workflow tasks.

For standard workflows, the following fields are set or blank:
(SET) workflow_document_id__v
(SET) workflow_document_major_version_number__v
(SET) workflow_document_minor_version_number__v
(BLANK) task_document_major_version_number__v
(BLANK) task_document_minor_version_number__v
(SET) task_verdict__v
(SET) task_capacity__v
(BLANK) task_document_capacity__v

For multi-document workflows, the following fields are set or blank
(SET) workflow_document_id__v
(BLANK) workflow_document_major_version_number__v
(BLANK) workflow_document_minor_version_number__v
(SET) task_document_major_version_number__v
(SET) task_document_minor_version_number__v
(SET) task_verdict__v
(BLANK) task_capacity__v
(SET) task_document_capacity__v

We've built a simple ETL tool to enable some custom reporting we can't get via the UI.  This inconsistent data model causes us issues as we now have to look at the workflow type to determine which fields we care about.  It's not hard to do, but it creates work for us on our end to re-align the data for our reporting purposes.

While we suspect that this is to ensure backwards compatibility, can we request that the fields be merged (or perhaps the values echoed into new task-level fields) so that a single query can pull back the same info from the same field for both standard and multi-document workflow tasks? If the legacy fields need to live on and continue to be populated for standard workflows, that's fine. In our scenario, we'd simply ignore them.  We believe this consistency will also make things easier for the the Vault reporting tools within the UI.

Here's a proposal for some standardized workflow tasks fields:
task_document_id__v <--- this field doesn't exist, but the "task_" prefix better aligns with the rest of the fields introduced with the multi-doc workflow changes 
task_document_major_version_number__v
task_document_minor_version_number__v
task_document_verdict__v <--- this field doesn't exist, but the "task_document_" prefix better reflects the scope of the verdict value
task_document_capacity__v

Legacy fields that can live on for backwards compatibility reasons:
workflow_document_id__v
workflow_document_major_version_number__v
workflow_document_minor_version_number__v
task_verdict__v
task_capacity__v

Let us know your thoughts. Thanks for considering our perspective as a customer who's looking for the simplest way to consume the data being generated by Vault.

Kevin

1 comment

  • Avatar
    George Lee Official comment

    Hi Kevin, the objective was to capture workflow and workflow task data from different type of workflows on the same document in a single report.  However, we did want to commingle different data types and values.  We will evaluate this request to see if we can enhance this or find a workaround.

Please sign in to leave a comment.