Duh! Good call.
Here is the vendor's website:
http://www.workflowgen.com/
All the user group documentation is on a Google site (pre um google
conversion,) so it's a little obfuscated, but we are happy to share more
info if folks are interested.
Santiago
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Zachary Johnson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Maybe I missed it... but does this product have any screencasts or demos or
> tours online?
>
>
> Santiago Fernandez-Gimenez wrote:
>
>> Yes, those concerns are always credible, and we've worked around some
>> concerns, especially related to validation. WFG itself has pretty hokey,
>> non-accessible validation built in. But we experimented with it and
>> discovered we could do pretty much whatever we wanted with the form code, so
>> we could use Javascript validation, .net validation, or we could build
>> something server-side.
>> There are definitely trade-offs, as with any development tool. For
>> example we want to redirect a user to a One Stop page upon submission (
>> "Thanks for submitting the form, and here are the expectations of when your
>> appeal will be resolved.") When we add the redirect out of the WFG system,
>> the whole form gets wrapped in a frame. Yuck. We complained to the vendor on
>> that one. That's certainly not ideal, but on the whole, we've found we have
>> pretty direct access to the markup.
>> Santiago
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Zachary Johnson <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> Sounds pretty interesting. When I hear "pre-existing .net tool" my
>> experience immediately makes me wonder about customizing form
>> markup, validation, error states, javascript hooks, etc. Often it
>> seems to be the case that you get point-and-click DW routing or
>> whatever at the expense of form usability and accessibility that
>> looks like it was hacked together in 2001. Any credibility to my
>> concerns with this particular solution?
>>
>> Zach
>>
>>
>> Santiago Fernandez-Gimenez wrote:
>>
>> Regarding the pre-populating of form data:
>>
>> One Stop has tons of paper / pdf forms that need automation.
>> Most of them include sensitive information. After a pretty
>> detailed analysis Academic Support Resources determined that the
>> type of software we needed to solve the "forms" quandary was
>> generically called "workflow" software— automating the form is
>> fairly trivial, but routing the data and doing the work was
>> difficult to solve securely. The Graduate School and Disability
>> Services, with a SPIF grant, had purchased a tool called
>> "Workflow Gen", and after comparing it with some business
>> criteria, we determined it was worth giving it a try, so we've
>> been piloting it this year. It is not an "Enterprise" tool at
>> this time, so each unit that participates is sharing the costs.
>>
>> WorkflowGen provides a web-based process management interface
>> that plugs into a .net form. You have to build the .net form in
>> Visual Studio, so hold your nose if you're a MS hater. MS
>> antipathy aside, we have found that the tool is pretty efficient
>> and opens the door to real service and process improvement.
>> * Form authentication is via the CAH hub.
>> * We are pre-populating the forms with appropriate data from
>> the DW,
>> providing students the opportunity to vett their PeopleSoft
>> information, and linking to the "personal information"
>> application
>> if they see something out of date. * We can pull in data
>> from the DW that is not visible on the form,
>> and use that for routing logic. * Someone with a
>> "business analyst" skill-set can plot out the
>> routing of a form with conditional logic and notifications
>> via a
>> point and click interface. * Someone with a
>> "junior-developer" skill-set can build the form in
>> .net and template the email responses. There is a
>> collaborative consortium / user group on campus
>> funding and using this tool, but based on our brief pilot
>> experience, we are advocating for this tool, or some sort of
>> generic workflow tool like it, to be adopted as a common good
>> for the enterprise.
>>
>> If you want to find out more about the tool, send an email to
>> our User Group listserve: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>. We have tons of
>> documentation if you want to hear more.
>>
>>
>> Sorry I missed the meeting. Sounds very interesting!
>>
>> Santiago
>>
>> -- Santiago Fernández-Giménez
>> information architect / web project manager
>> Academic Support Resources
>> University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
>>
>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>>
>> 612-625-6423
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Peter Wiringa <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote:
>>
>> Here are a few notes from my end and some questions for the
>> group.
>>
>> It sounded liked there was interest in a central repository
>> of form
>> information and including some basic form styles and elements
>> in the
>> templates would be useful. A general feedback form seems like
>> a good
>> starting point. What other types of form or multi-element
>> form parts
>> (i.e. EFS) might be good to include and would serve a broad
>> audience?
>>
>> For those of you using a tool to help generate forms and
>> client-side
>> or server-side validation, what tools are you using? Web Form
>> Factory may be generating again and provides a solid start for
>> simple forms, as a I recall (PHP only).
>>
>> http://www.webformfactory.com/
>>
>> On utilizing central authentication and LDAP to improve the UX
>> of
>> form by pre-populating info, it doesn't seem like we landed on
>> anything with regard to security considerations. If someone is
>> signed in, and would be forced to sign in if they weren't,
>> what are
>> the issues with pre-populating fields using information about
>> the
>> user that's publicly available in LDAP? Here's an example of
>> what
>> might be returned.
>>
>> http://ur-test.umn.edu/pete/cssdev/ldap-returns.html
>>
>> Anyone from OIT Security on the list who can shed some light
>> on this?
>>
>> As Chris suggested, you could attempt to pre-populate fields for
>> logged in users, but not requiring people to login. Switch to
>> HTTPS,
>> get their cookieauth cookie, run it up against the central
>> auth hub
>> to get their Internet ID, and then query that. Are there
>> different
>> security implications for pre-populating fields in this case?
>>
>> Of course, directory-suppressed students won't be found in
>> public
>> searches of LDAP.
>>
>> Central auth info
>> http://www1.umn.edu/is/cookieauth/
>>
>> Accessible anti-spam techniques
>> http://webaim.org/blog/spam_free_accessible_forms/
>>
>> Good read on validation
>>
>> http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/07/07/web-form-validation-best-practices-and-tutorials/
>>
>>
>> -- Peter Wiringa
>> Electronic Communications
>> University Relations
>> University of Minnesota
>> (612) 625-3252
>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "I gotta hold on to my angst. I preserve it because I need it.
>> It
>> keeps me sharp, on the edge, where I gotta be." - V. Hanna
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- ______________________________
>> Zachary Johnson * Web Manager
>> Student Unions & Activities
>> (612) 624 - 7270
>> http://www.sua.umn.edu/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Santiago Fernández-Giménez
>> information architect / web project manager
>> Academic Support Resources
>> University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
>>
>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> 612-625-6423
>>
>
> --
> ______________________________
> Zachary Johnson * Web Manager
> Student Unions & Activities
> (612) 624 - 7270
> http://www.sua.umn.edu/
>
--
Santiago Fernández-Giménez
information architect / web project manager
Academic Support Resources
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
[log in to unmask]
612-625-6423
|
