Replacing the Request Details standard form: does it comprise just "h_summary" and "h_description"?

[Berto2002]

I have an issue with some Users writing really long Incident Summaries in the standard Request Details form. When the workflow gets to adding the Request to a Board as a Card, using the Summary as the Title, we get an error that there's a character limit. I could truncate at that stage but what it's revealed is that some users are writing long sentences in the Summary or pasting the Description into the Summary; so I want to stop that at source (logging).

In our standard Request flow, I have fixed this by entering a Regex validation to only allow 100 chars in the Summary: ^(?!(^-|-$|.{100,})).*

But our Incident flow was built using the standard Request Details form which we cannot configure:

When I view that form it looks like it is just two fields:

So I want to replace the standard form with a custom form that does exactly the same thing but where I can input Regex. All I would like to know is to confirm the standard form comprises just "h_summary" and "h_description" and what is the FormID I should use since that is not listed for standard forms and is important for workflows. I intend to add a custom form with just those two fields (and the same FormID) so it does exactly the same without risk to my BPM?

Thank you.

[Bob Dickinson]

Hi @Berto2002

Yes it comprises of the two fields you mention - and your solution should be perfectly feasible. 

One thing to keep in mind though - the out-of-the-box Summary/Description form has also been built to work so that if a request is raised off the back of an email, the text in the Subject/Body of the email is populated into the Summary/Description of the form during the progressive capture. If this is something you would like to retain, then when creating the replacement Custom Form, ensure to get it the following Form ID:

customformdefaults

Then also make sure you map the two fields to h_summary, and h_description as you've described. And hopefully that should result in the desired replica which you can add your regex too.

Thanks

Bob

[Berto2002]

@Bob Dickinson thank you. That is exactly the sort of 'gotcha' I thought might be there and I have indeed done that now; and added text from this post into the notes field for the future. I now have this in test.