on 01-08-2014 11:16 AM
Hi All
I'm currently looking at a requirement to provide team viewer and team calendar functionality using the standard MSS WDA components. This normally works using the org structure and evaluation paths, however, in this particular instance we have no "usable" org structure. The reason why there is no usable org structure is too complicated to explain, but what does exist is a custom table that defines the relationship between manager and employee. This is a very simple table with two columns, userid of the employee and the user id of the manager.
We do have employee records that are attached to users via IT0105, and what we would like to do is use the custom table that defines the relationship between manager and employee as the basis for the team viewer in MSS.
I know there isn't a simple solution to this like doing some config, we'll have to code it if we're going to get it to work in any way shape or form. But my questions are: are there any BADIs that would allow us to amend the employee list fed to the team viewer? Would this need to be done as an enhancement instead? Or is it even worth pursuing this, ie is the effort involved in achieving this too great (we have fairly tight deadlines)?
There is also the option of going down the bespoke route. Ideally though we'd like to use the MSS components if possible. But if the work involved to get this to work using the standard MSS components is much greater compared to going down the bespoke route, then we'll abandon this approach.
Does anyone have any previous experience on this or done something similar they can suggest?
Thanks
Dion
Hi Dion,
The Team Viewer is most probably set up using the functionality of Object and Data Provider.
The Object and Data Provider allows you to set up custom views and write custom function modules to determine the list of objects returned in that data provider. I have done this in custom MSS forms in the past, I have never attempted to point the standard team viewer to a custom object and ata provider.
You could probably investigate along these lines, and see how you get along.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Dion,
There is a table V_TWPC_OBJSEL which lists the objects. Now you will have to determine which of these is used in the Team viewer, and I would expect it to be something like MSS_TMV_EE_DIR.
This has two rules assigned to it
1) Rules to determine Root Objects - MSS_TMV_RULE1
2) Rules to determine Target Objects - MSS_TMV_RULE5
The table V_TWPC_OBJSELRUL has settings for rules for these objects
Currently you can see that MSS_TMV_RULE1 is set up to use an evaluation path SAP_MANG
You could copy this rule ino a Z Rule and change it to look at an Evaluation Path.
YOu could then go back to the other table and assign your Z rule to the object that is called in the team viewer.
SAP has provided sample FMs HRWPC_PATHROOTS and HRWPC_ EVAL_PATH to determine the root objects and target objects you could copy these into Z function modules put your own code in here, and that is all there is to it.
I am not a programmer, I had a good team helping me, and this was done a few years ago, but it worked just fine, this was all there was to it, if I remember correctly.
Just ensure you find the correct object which is called in the standard Team Viewer.
All the best.
Hello Dion,
As mentioned by Harish above, through OADP configurations it should be possible to achive, as OADP allows you to configure function modules to get the data. For team calendar above described should work. For team viewer you would need to configure the function modules in
MSS_BIZ_RULE1
MSS_BIZ_RULE2
MSS_BIZ_RULE5
You may have to put a dummy function module which simply returns what is passed, for RULE1 or RULE5 as OADP needs all the three nodes to work correctly..
In OADP, You can reuse the Function modules, for example refer here
http://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=190743879 http://scn.sap.com/thread/3475010
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Dion,
I don't think this is a good approach to achieve your expected outcomes. There are many standard attributes to be considered while you think of it:
Data wise:
Org. Structure
Relationship between OM objects.
Reporting wise:
Evaluation Paths
Functional Modules
I suggest you to withdraw this thought, there is no meaning in gothing with such ventures.
Rather I suggest you to update the standard Org.structure based on your custom table.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
88 | |
7 | |
6 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.