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