Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

To me, a "required" field means it is required to have some entry in it befor

e you move forward with anything; not that the field is simply highlighted with
a colorful border, and you can just nonchalantly ignore the field and move along
. However, surprisingly enough, that's just what Adobe Interactive Forms do with
in the HCM Processes and Forms Start Application for creating and updating forms.
But maybe there is some method to that madness and a simple way for you to insure
a required field is truly required. Hopefully, this blog will help shed some lig
ht on both issues.

What are the symptoms, doctor?

Here is how this will typically go .
First, as a great HCM P&F developer, you will set your form fields to requi
red which requires no coding from you and appears so easy and simple. Of course,
you do this because as a good developer, you want to handle as much of the valid
ation on the front end as you can to save any extra trips to the backend. That s j
ust obvious, right? Next, you will launch your custom process that brings up you
r form in edit mode. You will not enter anything in your required fields as you
are quite secure in the fact that you set these fields in your design as required
and Adobe will handle the rest for you (thank goodness you didn t have to write a
bunch of validation code yet again, eh?) You simply click the check and send butt
on. You will lean back in your comfortable chair all full of pride in your great
work. You expect an error message to pop-up at any moment now and tell you to c
omplete all required fields as it stops you dead-in-your-tracks. However, you wi
ll actually move quite easily to the next step where you can simply send your fo
rm on it s way. No validation check happened. No pop-up message appeared. No littl
e error even poked it s head up .not even a peep.
What happened?!?! Surely something must be wrong! Was the form activated ? Le
t s check yes, it was. Were the form fields actually marked as required ? Let s check yes,
they were. What s going on here? Is ADS down? Is something flakey going on? Maybe the
y are running some conversion. Maybe the system is going down. Maybe BASIS is doi
ng something. This can t be right. What did I miss?!?! What is this bizzaro world
I have become trapped in where required fields are not required?!?!?!?! ARRGGGGG

It s just as easy as setting Required Fields in Adobe s LiveCylce Designer right? WR

First off, what are we talking about here? Well, via the LiveCylce Designer
, we have a very straightforward way to set our form fields as required for entry.
This is a simple matter of selecting this value for our form control as follows
from the Value sub-tab on our Object pallet:
LiveCycle settings

We can also handle this dynamically via scripts in the form. For example using J
avascript, we could place the following code in our form ready event:

this.mandatory = error ;

(to turn it off, we could also set it as this.mandatory =

disabled ; )

(** scripting help here: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/livecycle/es/lcdesigner_scr


During runtime, either way of setting this value (static or dynamic) has the eff
ect of highlighting our required fields with a thick colorful border as a visual
cue for the end user.
Highlight fields

Keep in mind, this functionality is controlled by the end user. They can se
lect to highlight or un-highlight required fields as well as setting the color f
or the highlighting effect (default is red as shown) all through their Adobe Rea
der settings and functions. I make a special note of this for two reasons, both
due to experience from a recent project. For example, our functional team had wr
itten test scripts to distribute out to our global test teams which included the
step verify required fields appear with a red border . This would be failed by som
e testers because (1) they had not selected the highlight required fields option i
n their Reader (2) they had changed the color of the highlight function or had t
urned it off completely. Lessons learned. (haha) In addition, we encountered a V
ERY strange behavior in which the fields would highlight for one user but not fo
r another. Stranger still, if testing using two different test users on the same
machine via the portal, fields would highlight for one test user but not the ot
her even through the same process! This is still an ongoing issue to be resolved
. My feeling is that it might have something to do with users having both Adobe
Reader and Acrobat in different version on the same machine or various Reader ve
rsions installed or they simply need to upgrade to Reader 9.0 (currently most ar
e on 8.1.4). But I digress. Back to making our required fields required!

Now, back to our settings, we see many options when we mark the field as required :
Validation settings
As you see, we have all kinds of great validations available. First off, we
can display a message if the field is left empty. Also, we could set a validati
on pattern and then have a validation pattern message appear if this pattern was n
ot correctly entered. Lastly, we could set a validation script to run and also d
isplay a message. All this is well documented in the LiveCylce Designer help doc
umentation. Sadly, for us, it is pretty much of little to no use.

Why it does not work as you might expect

To understand why our required fields do not seem to work as required field
s, we really have to understand what is really going on under the hood with our
Adobe Interactive Form. Basically, it is quite simple. Keep in mind that our act
ual form is merely a template or window through which we are entering data. The da
ta is the important part and it is simply saved behind the scenes as XML. For th
e most part, our form is not truly submitted but saved. This is the key! If we
review Adobe s help documentation in regards to form field validation, we will see
the most telling of clues:

Adobe doc

In case you can not read the small print there, it reads:

Note: Users can save and close a PDF form without providing required values. In
this case, no validation is performed.

Again, our forms are not actually submitted in the true sense, but are save
d behind the scenes. Therefore, true to the note from Adobe, the validation chec
ks are not performed. You can test this quite easily by placing script in the va
lidation event for your control. For example, I threw in a simple pop-up message
(ie. low-tech Javascript debugging method #101 FTW..haha) .app.alert( HERE ); .and as e
xpected, this would NEVER get triggered.

Forcing a square peg in a round hole just does not work

Given this information, if you are like me, you might take this as some kin
d of challenge. I thought ok well, I will just force the validation another way. I ll
trick it into working! Not so fast there tough guy. Haha I placed script code in
to just about every other event to in turn fire my validation check for the requ
ired field. For example, maybe during the change event of one control, you check t
o make sure it adheres to some business logic. Sure ..it fires but only if the change
event happens. That s not always a given. In other attempts, it would fire the val
idation, but too much (ie. constant pop-up windows) or in the wrong sequence. In
the end, it just was not consistent or easy to implement.

And here is the most important reason of all why it just does not work ..No matter
what you do to trigger the validation check, even if an error occurs, it does n
ot stop the transition of the application from going from check and send to send . Th
e user still moves along in the process! The only thing that will stop the form
from moving forward and truly make the user correct their entries is a hard error
that comes form the backend. Therefore, our solution is quite simple.

Let's Try a Different Approach....How about setting it in the backend? Nope.

If you look closley at the form field configuration under your form scenari
o in the backend, you will see a setting for "field attribute" which according t
o the documentation, "determines the field properties for each field that you us
e in an interactive form". This "should" affect how the form field behaves on th
e front-end by the setting in back-end. However, up till now, this setting reall
y is of little to no use (ie. I have never seen it's effect actually work!) I ha
ve gotten into the habit of just not using it (as I want to set this how I want
on the presentation layer, ie. form, and not from the backend dictating it). If
anything, it can be used to "document" the usage on the form. There is OSS note
1239961 which does fix this a bit. It makes it so that if you set a form field t
o "required", it will actually check that the field is not empty (ie. mandatory)

, but it does not do any other real validation for us. So, this one too is reall
y not our option. Next?

If you build it, they will come .or at least your form will act right
First off, if you have in fact bound your form fields (via config) to stand
ard backend services (SAP_PA, SAP_PT or SAP_PD), you will receive any and all fi
eld validations that they handle. However, in many cases, the messages you recei
ve will be a little cryptic and not very telling to the actual cause (ie. field s
o-and-so is empty ). In most cases regardless if our fields are bound to standard
services or not, we will need to provide our own custom field validations. How d
o we do this? In the end, we will be back to our good ol friend, the generic serv

Personally, I have yet to develop a form scenario/step that required some l

evel of form editing (create/update) that did not require a custom generic servi
ce for validation. However, the approach to this might vary.
service config

I will not go through what a generic service is and/or how it works, but I will
give you a rough idea of a few approaches I have seen/done.

First off .the utility approach. You can develop a common validation service that
contains a number of generic operations. This could be re-used across a number of
processes/scenarios/steps. For example, your operations might include IS_EMPTY , IS
_NUMERIC , IS_NEGATIVE , IS_VALID_DATE , and on and on and on. In this way, via your con
figuration, you would call very specific operations. The drawback here is that y
ou will have several operation calls mapped to several field groups. Also, the e
rror messages you return would be fairly generic.

Second the simple form step specific approach. Using this approach, you would
write a validation generic service very specific to your particular form scenar
io step. You would pass over all the fields as one field group to the generic se
rvice. Within the service, you would collect the field values and perform your r
equired validations. The advantage here is that you can customize the error mess
ages very specific to your form (ex. Please complete the new salary amount below
current salary. ) The disadvantage here is that you might be using other validatio
n services for other steps within the same process and the validations can easil
y become disjointed or inconsistent. You might also be repeating code in service
s that could otherwise be shared/reusable/modularized.

Third the process or form scenario approach. This approach is a bit more invo
lved; however, it will keep all validations related to a process encapsulated wi
thin one service. The key here is that within your field groups that you will pa
ss to operations, you will be sure to pass the FORM_SCENARIO_STAGE field. This f
ield contains the exact name of the current form scenario step. Therefore, withi
n your service, you could use a CASE statement to check this value and determine s

pecific validation operations based on that step. For example, perhaps in the req
uest step we want to validate some set of fields, but then in the approve step, we
want to check those fields plus an additional set of fields. This is quite easy
to code for using the FORM_SCENARIO_STAGE field. This service will be very speci
fic to our proecess/form scenario, so keep that in mind should the process chang
Beware, due to how the HCM P&F dispatcher collects information and processes our s
ervices, you need to make sure that your form scenarios call different operation
s (ie. the names) although these operations might trigger the same internal priv
ate methods. This is because it will attempt to collect all datasets used for an
operation and call it. So if a previous set of data calls the same operation na
me, it will try to use this. I have personally seen this happen when a return to
action sent step 2 back to step 1 . It would actually call the service with th
e date from step 1 but would call it again using data from step 2 which would error
for us due to our validations. It should have only used the data from the step w
e were on (step 1). This was because step 1 and step2 used the same operation na
me, but we decided what to do based on the step name internally. Again, simply c
hanging the operation name (although it called the same method in our generic se
rvice) for step 2 fixed this.
BONUS: Trick from the trenches
If you have read through everything this far (God bless ya!), I will give a
way one of my little tricks for how I handle validation services .free of charge f
or once! (haha) For all of my validation services, I include an additional field
in my form fields and my service fields that is a simple trigger . In form field c
onfiguration, it is a simple one character field. Let s call it FLAG_VALIDATE . I the
n place this field on my form and set it s form ready event to set it s value to X (this
.rawValue = X ;). In the backend, I have this field mapped to my generic service (t
he field in the service, I typically call EVENT_TRIGGER ) to my validation operatio
n. Let s say VALIDATE_FORM . So my mapping might be:

form field FLAG_VALIDATE -> field grp VALID -> operation VALIDATE_FORM -> servic

Next, I create a rule that I attach to the VALIDATE_FORM operation. It will

be something like FLAG_VALIDATE = X . Therefore, my validation service only gets
alled when the FLAG_VALIDATE field is equal to X . Now, back over to my form, for
NY other form field (date picker, text input, button, etc) that triggers any oth
er kind of backend user event where I do NOT want the validation service to trig
ger (because a user might still be filling in information), I will modify the ev
ent associated with the control that calls my user event to also set the FLAG_VA
LIDATE raw value to
(blank) before it calls the user event. In this way, we are
icking our validation service not to be called, but as the form returns back to u
s, the validate flag will be reset to X in the form ready event. Pretty sneaky


eh? (

So that s it. That s why the Adobe form required fields do not quite act as we might e
xpect, and also how we whip them back into shape to get our intended results. No
w, you can get back to leaning back in that comfortable chair and taking pride i

n your clever work. Till next time .