Jeremy Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 When logging certain requests we make decision based on users email addresses but when we log into the new portal it does not honour these decisions.... basically if you have a @port.ac.uk email address it let's you proceed and if you have any other email address it will refuse your request with an incorrect account message. New Employee Portal Current Portal allows access: The PCF decision is as follows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 hi @Jeremy, I created simple flow like below to make a test and it works for me. Just can't find a reason why is not working for you. If you could make same test as me and see how it works for you. For your convenience I exported and attached the flow to my post. Thank you, Miro email-branch.pcf.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 @Miro this works however this is not how we are making the decisions... this is our PCF The decision 'port.ac.uk' is as below, which looks at the customers' email address who is submitting the form and it is this decision that is not working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 @Jeremy I did update to my flow and replaced the first form with customer search, checking for h_email field now - it is still working. In customer search could you add extra field "email" to display and make sure you got expected email set? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 I have added the email field to the PCF and my email address should allow me through, I have also tried to change the decision to 'ends with' rather than 'contains' and still get the same error. It's just strange as the 'old' portal works with no issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 @Jeremy could you post your flow here as attachment? If needed make a clone and remove any sensitive data from it. This is the only way I could check it. Thank you, Miro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 @Miro here you go adobe-activation.pcf.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 @Jeremyjust to clarify, you start you pro capture and this is what you see, there are no other forms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 28, 2020 Author Share Posted February 28, 2020 @Miro correct, with your email address this is what should happen, but if you have an email that ends port.ac.uk you should get this page: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 @Jeremy first I need to make sure - this pro cap should start with Customer Search form then only form you can see if the final form. If this is the case then I found that there is quite a lot of forms stripped down - this is set somewhere is SM. Before I will involve here anyone else I need to make sure this it the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 28, 2020 Author Share Posted February 28, 2020 @Miro I'm not sure of the question that is being asked. If the customer has en email address ending in port.ac.uk they should get the T&Cs page, if they have any other email address they should see the incorrect account page, we have got a customer search node preceding this as described in the PCF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 @Jeremy sorry for any confusions. Just need to clarify what you first see when you run pro cap in emplyee portal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 28, 2020 Author Share Posted February 28, 2020 These are videos of the different portals and how it treats the forms Old Portal link - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CHTdXFEXKrvHuczc6VsMyfArl0HgYr7i New Portal link - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Vp3OhkBgwObvQ2ZPlARFtVUrzqkhvrN5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 @Jeremy thats perfect answer. Seems like we are missing some initial data in new portal. I will make aware my coworkers who works on that bit. Thank you, Miro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Boardman Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 @Jeremy the issue has been fixed and will be available in the next service manager update, which is looking like next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted April 20, 2020 Author Share Posted April 20, 2020 @Miro, @Steven Boardman looks like I may of found something else I had designed a new form where there are decision based on nearly every question these work for the first 4 sections, but after this they fail and despite the logic for the quest being the same they do not appear with the extra steps. Correct logic But the next section The 'same logic' doesn't work and seems to be getting confused with the n/a option After some investigation it appears that n/a is being treated the same as No, can this be looked into? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted April 20, 2020 Share Posted April 20, 2020 @Jeremy the very first thing I would check is operator CONTAINS. It basically checking if this specific string (in that case "No") exist in variable. Could you show me answer values? If you have that word used in more than one answer then it could match to it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted April 20, 2020 Author Share Posted April 20, 2020 @Miro we have Yes, No and n/a which is picked from a simple list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted April 20, 2020 Share Posted April 20, 2020 @Jeremy ok thinking how I can replicate/test your case. If I ask you to send me flow it won't work as I will be missing your simple lists... The only way is to have API key, then run it and make inspections step by step on my machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted April 20, 2020 Author Share Posted April 20, 2020 @Miro I will pm you the key Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted April 20, 2020 Share Posted April 20, 2020 @Jeremy just noticed that values are numbers and your condition is expecting to find a "No" string - which is part of display value. In that case you should update value to contain that string or test with the number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted April 20, 2020 Author Share Posted April 20, 2020 I'm so sorry I did think that this was the issue but when I went to change it there were errors that appeared....but this was something separate that was not correct. I will give up on decisions in PCFs! This was raised by me a few weeks ago and I didn't remember sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miro Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 @Jeremy so just to clarify, you got "decisions" working now? Maybe we need to review wiki page describing decisions and see if there is a place for any improvements. I will let know about it my work colleagues who are working on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now