samwoo

+1 to all of the above. Also: I think grouping functionality, similar to the Email Templates, would be of huge benefit here (as well as in the Email Routing Rules area)

+1 - we have some services with hidden catalog items so this would be useful +1 - This is important to us as well Here are some other suggestions: Define a customer (user or contact) - useful for a Distribution List or Mailbox Contact/User account for example Define Related Services Ability to assign to a Board upon the ticket being logged

+1 - so effectively locking the container on the right-side to the screen and locking the top bar to the top.

Ah I got it! "Unique Conditions" is the wrong term. It should be "Question Constraints" - similar to how it works in SQL.

I hope there wasn't a feeling that I hijacked this thread... my message above was a potential solution that I thought of to @Sam P's query, before I saw the latest message about having to see all the data in the same screen - though if users could present the data within question groups, then maybe having them displayed tabular could still work? Maybe if we extend the idea to allow users to specify the format/display of the question groups and choosing tabular could allow the addition of a plus and minus button at the end of each row, and when one adds a new row, it appears underneath, like you would see in a table. Again, users could define the "Unique Conditions". The storage of these questions would still be the same regardless of how the questions are presented (as tabular or as standard), so in the BPM, in a foreach start and foreach end node, you and still act on the answers. Not sure if it's possible or not but hopefully it is. Thanks, Samuel

@Gerry Would it be possible to implement "Question Groups" in ICF? These groups would be subject to the same rules as existing questions as they are now (with conditions, label text, validation etc), but when editing a question group, you could specify the questions within the group. The questions in the group would then be subject to the same rules as other fields (with conditions, label text, validation etc), but only within that group. This would allow progressive capture to display add/remove/next/previous buttons at the bottom of the group (plus a count of questions answered in the group) if users need to add another answer to the same question. So you could have your main set of questions above and below the question group (or multiple question groups) and everything gets stored in the JSON. In the Business Process, similar to the parallel process nodes, we could have a foreach start and foreach end node that works just for the questions in the question groups. This is because the questions in the question groups will be the same all the time (although the ability to show/hide questions based on the answers to others should still be possible). The only issue I can see is validation on existing answers, so maybe in the question groups configuration, we could define a question to be "unique" meaning if the value supplied was already used, then we can either display a warning (but allow to continue) or an error (and prevent continuing). * EDIT: Or similar to the Conditional Questions, we could have a tab in the question group that allows us to define Unique Conditions (for lack of better terminology) where the user can define which fields determines the uniqueness and whether each uniqueness displays and error (and prevent continue), a warning or allow to continue, and this could be defined multiple times. Just a thought! Thanks, Samuel

+1 for this feature

Thanks @Steve Giller, While the concept of a Dashboard/Slideshows are traditionally to be used with non-interactive display screens, I think it's worth considering adapting to the changing work environment/culture. With many of us now working remotely, maybe there should be consideration to redefining the Dashboard's purpose? If Hornbill would consider redefining the Dashboards purpose, then maybe there is an opportunity to enable users to configure Dashboards as either 'Automatic' or 'Interactive.' An 'Automatic' Dashboard could be suitable for display screens and would go hand-in-hand with the Slideshows functionality, with auto-refresh and scrolling features for Widgets. An 'Interactive' Dashboard could offer scrolling, clickable links, and other interactive elements for those working remotely. Our IT managers rely on Dashboards to scrutinize our IT services. While Slideshows are suitable for quick stats, an Interactive Dashboard would be ideal for a detailed examination. This way, we can cater to both scenarios, for quick high-level glances and in-depth analysis. This might be one for @Gerry to have a think about? In an ideal world, I would love to not have to use external tools for this purpose (ie. Power BI), when what is already offered is fantastic can almost achieve what we would like it to achieve, hence my request for the enhancements in my posts above. Thanks, Samuel

I just noticed the tag is set to: Please could an Mod change it so it appears as "enhancement" instead, as I suspect this could prevent the developers from seeing my post.

Hello, My colleague also suggested that if a scrollbar is not feasible in the Data List widget, then maybe the results could be paginated, and the widget could show previous/next buttons. Thanks, Samuel

Good afternoon, I just wanted to say that I tested adding a scrollbar using the F12 Developer Tools (overflow = auto) and it looks good:

+1

Hi @Steve G, I outputted using your tip (Get-HB-Params), and weirdly the JSON within the XML comes out as HTML Encoded causing the output to look like this: Now weirdly, the JSON within the <questions> element is working fine. But the JSON within the <questionFieldMap> element only updates the last custom field defined (h_custom_21). I at least have a workaround thanks to @CraigP's help to update the request after it's been logged, though I haven't noticed anything yet, I do worry that the BPM starting at the point of logging the ticket and me updating the request after the ticket has been logged, may mean that certain bits of information could be missed in the BPM instance at the beginning. I suspect that once I produce the Email Template to notify the Leaver's Manager that the ticket has been logged at the beginning, it will not be able to capture the values of these custom fields... so at the moment all I can think of to work around this is to make sure the ticket is paused or put on-hold for 1 minute (if possible) then follow that up with a "Get Request Details" node. Now I'm not 100% sure the HTML encoding is an issue (it might be, I guess it depends on the endpoint and its ability to parse the encoded values?) but I wonder if you might consider creating and supporting a new version of the HornbillAPI PowerShell module (maybe called HornbillAPI_JSON?) that produces the params as a JSON instead of XML and have that sent over instead, which might prevent this issue from occurring? Thanks, Samuel

@CraigP - Genius! You know when you've been looking at something for so long, you cannot see the obvious... thank you, it works! @Steve G Thanks for the tip, in an ideal world it would be better to use the questionFieldMap field using the logServiceRequest Service. When I get a moment, I'll use your tip to find out what is being produced before initiating it.

Thanks @Steve Giller - Would be good to see if someone else could offer any insights as well. In fact, I can also confirm this issue with the /Requests/update API as well. https://api.hornbill.com/apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/Requests?op=update The bit that runs to update the ticket: $customFields = [PSCustomObject]@{} $customFields | Add-Member -MemberType NoteProperty -Name 'h_custom_h' -Value 'han<REDACTED>' $customFields | Add-Member -MemberType NoteProperty -Name 'h_custom_e' -Value 'Hannah <REDACTED>' $outcome = Update-HB-Request-CustomFields -requestid 'SR00168595' -customFields ($customFields | ConvertTo-Json -Compress) This is what the JSON looks like: {"h_custom_h":"han<REDACTED>","h_custom_e":"Hannah <REDACTED>"} This is the function I built to work alongside the HornbillAPI: function Update-HB-Request-CustomFields { param ( [Parameter ( Mandatory = $true )] [string]$requestid, [Parameter ( Mandatory = $true )] [string]$customFields ) Add-HB-Param -ParamName 'requestId' -ParamValue $requestid -ParamAllowEmpty $false Add-HB-Param -ParamName 'customFields' -ParamValue $jsonObject -ParamAllowEmpty $false $xmlmcOutput = Invoke-HB-XMLMC 'apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/Requests' 'update' return $xmlmcOutput } This is the response running the function: No updates to the request: (Ignore the T, I added that via the ticket to see if it was working) Could the new Custom Fields recently added have knocked out some of the APIs?

I just did another test by removing the part that generates the "h_custom_21" key/value, and now nothing is populating. This gives me a sense that there is a defect somewhere as none of the VARCHAR(255) fields are being populated.

I haven't logged on yet, but are they in requests extended?

Good evening, Is this the correct input for questionFieldMap for the logServiceRequest API? { "h_custom_e":"<REDACTED>", "h_custom_h":"<REDACTED>", "h_custom_i":"<REDACTED>", "h_custom_o":"<REDACTED>", "h_custom_21":"2023-01-09 00:00:00" } In my PowerShell script, I have everything else working (including the questions field) and the ticket is logged successfully, except the input for questionFieldMap partially works... it only maps to h_custom_21 and not the other fields defined above. The above is the output when running the variable in the terminal on VSCode, I just redacted the sensitive information. I did try to do it differently and it doesn't work at all if it comes over like this (with each field as a separate child) - so I am assuming the above format is correct, I just can't work out why it's only mapping to the last in the JSON Object despite the whole thing going through with no errors. [ { "h_custom_e":"<REDACTED>" }, { "h_custom_h":"<REDACTED>" }, { "h_custom_i":"<REDACTED>" }, { "h_custom_o":"<REDACTED>" }, { "h_custom_21":"2023-01-09 00:00:00" } ] Any help would be appreciated. @Steve G sorry for picking on you but I have seen you respond to other people's requests on the forums about the logServiceRequest API in the past, wondering if you might be able to quickly spot the issue? Thanks, Samuel

Good afternoon, I was wondering if there has been any further discussion in-house by any chance?

Good afternoon, I would like to request a new Hornbill Automation for the RequestConnections entity called Get Request Connection Details. The idea is for this to be used for multiple possibilities as time goes on and as people request more outputs to be added. But to start with, the Node Input should contain the following: Request ID (Mandatory) Connection Type (Optional) [Auto = All, Manual = <Dropdown>, Variable = Variable] Connection Customer Type (Optional) [Auto = Any, Manual = Any, Co-Worker, Contact, Variable = Variable] Connection User Class (Optional) [Auto = Any, Manual = Any, Full User, Basic User, Variable = Variable] Connection User Company (Optional) [Auto = Any, Manual = <Dropdown>, Variable = Variable] The Node Output should contain the following: Connection Email Addresses (Seperated by Commas or Semi-Colons) Connection Names (Seperated by Commas, Semi-Colons, or Line Breaks) Count of Connections (0 if None, else count based in the Input Criteria) What I really wanted is to be able to do is Count the number of Connections by Connection Type against a Request, so, for example, I can branch out based on a count of 0 Connections of Connection Type X against the Request, but this idea could hit multiple birds with one stone, with the ability to hit more birds with the same stone as time goes on. Thanks, Samuel

thanks @Gerry - I appreciate the . I'll keeping a sharp eye for the release and will make the change promptly once it's available.

Good afternoon, I would like to request the ability to display a board in full screen (using a URL parameter like we can with dashboards, with a button to also take us full screen where we can copy the URL). This would go a long way to enabling embedding the Board in Dashboards, on a screen or elsewhere, without having the rest of the Hornbill App showing around it. Essentially so it just looks like this: Thanks, Samuel

Thanks @AlexTumber, exciting news. I'll shall obey your advice Cheers, Samuel

Good morning, I would like to request the ability to reassign templates to a different Entity. For example, I have a bunch of Release related Emails under the "Requests" entity, and I wanted to reassign them to the "Release" Entity as a way of grouping the Email Templates accordingly (in addition to the new Grouping functionality) Thanks, Samuel PS. The Email Templates under each of the Service Manager entities are useable in the BPM and within Tickets... right?

Hi @Gerry and @Steve Giller, Thank you for getting in touch. I had been using iBridge as I cannot see any options related to Simple Lists under Hornbill Automation. Are you able to provide a screenshot to show where I need to look? Many thanks, Samuel