Document Numbering in Buzzsaw Forms

[Anonymous]

We are extensively using Buzzsaw forms in our projects and we found a serious deficiency in numbering the forms persists in Buzzsaw 6.

Should a user create a form without submitting it properly, the assigned document number (generated when creating the form) will be skipped and these frequently skipped numbers make our project information management "off-track". In Buzzsaw 5, we even have another problem of duplicate document numbers caused by the built-in timeout function.

We made a suggestion to Autodesk long time ago that, for quality assurance and information tracking / completeness purposes, the document number should be assigned only after the form is properly submitted. This approach will avoid both duplicate and missing document numbers for the form log. However, Autodesk commented that other customers objected to this idea.

As a heavy users of forms, I have no clue why "other customers" made this comment, especially when traceability of information is of utmost importance in using this kind of centralised project information management system. Any comments / objection? If my suggestion is valid, we have to express it to Autodesk for improvement.

Arion

[Anonymous]

In an earlier version of forms on Buzzsaw, document numbers were saved on submission and were never editable. We had several customers complain about this and request that document numbers be assigned at creation. We also had customers complain about misordered documents, duplicate document numbers, and missing document numbers. So, we decided to assign document numbers on creation and have these document numbers editable, so that they could be changed if they were misordered. In addition, the "next document number" is editable by admins. Also a draft can be saved before first submission of a form, because the document number has already been assigned to the form. This is where we are now. In certain cases, as you referred to, there will be missing document numbers. You (except on some custom forms) can still go back and edit these document numbers - which we assumed would be a good compromise, but in actuality probably isn't enough. We're looking at some different solutions going forward that will hopefully work for everyone (or at least a good majority). Hope this information provides some rationale. "arionsky" wrote in message news:25158802.1111650061863.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2.autodesk.com... > We are extensively using Buzzsaw forms in our projects and we found a > serious deficiency in numbering the forms persists in Buzzsaw 6. > > Should a user create a form without submitting it properly, the assigned > document number (generated when creating the form) will be skipped and > these frequently skipped numbers make our project information management > "off-track". In Buzzsaw 5, we even have another problem of duplicate > document numbers caused by the built-in timeout function. > > We made a suggestion to Autodesk long time ago that, for quality assurance > and information tracking / completeness purposes, the document number > should be assigned only after the form is properly submitted. This > approach will avoid both duplicate and missing document numbers for the > form log. However, Autodesk commented that other customers objected to > this idea. > > As a heavy users of forms, I have no clue why "other customers" made this > comment, especially when traceability of information is of utmost > importance in using this kind of centralised project information > management system. Any comments / objection? If my suggestion is valid, > we have to express it to Autodesk for improvement. > > Arion

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the explanation.

However, in reality, at least the general practice in UK and Asia, we want an unique and sequential identifiers (Document No in this case) to distinguish each piece of project information. Missing, duplicate, etc identifiers are unacceptable for quality checking and tracing (sofar as I recall, it is one of the ISO requirements in managing data). We therefore doubt why complaints are received from "other customers", as claimed by Autodesk.

"Open" sharing of project experience with other counterparts around the world could help us identifying what are the "real" differences among different "worlds" do. It is the purpose of my e-mail too.