Forbide SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1

[Sandra_Rossi]

I guess everything has been said above SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1, SO_NEW_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1

SO_NEW_DOCUMENT_ATT_SEND_API1.

These FM are very difficult to handle, they often lead to problems with attachments. Using CL_BCS solves most of these problems.

Could questions about these FMs be banned? (as for questions about dates)

[Former Member]

This is very usefull feedback for moderators to know how forum members feel about where the "common acceptable denominator" is. Only catering for the gurus who don't ask any questions is going too far, but at the least an RTFM should have been done, also by freshers.

I completely agree with Harald's comments about the "so called" top contributors who answer basic series of interview questions to score a few more points. It is a belittlement of the moderators and many other forum member's efforts to improve the quality of the forums and I have very little tolerance left for it. One of them only and regularly uses the Abuse Reports when not given points for answering such questions.

But ultimately the system itself is to be blamed for extracting such childish behaviour from some of the SCN members. The comments to the Satisfaction Survey is a nice example of this and I found it very funny to watch all the "feedback"...

Specifically to the SO_DOC* FM's, we will keep an eye out for them. Perhaps Matt wants to add it to his "forbidden questions" sticky thread as well?

The ultimate control would be to add the names off all unreleased function modules to the SDN content filters...

Cheers,

Julius

[Former Member]

<div class="jive-quote">

Specifically to the SO_DOC* FM's, we will keep an eye out for them. Perhaps Matt wants to add it to his "forbidden questions" sticky thread as well?<br />

</div>

Well, I think we should be very careful with such approaches. Just try a simple search on SDN for SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1 and look at a couple of them. Tons of links will show up, tons of them will not mention CL_BCS. Then try using a search with something like <em>send email via ABAP</em> and check the links. Prominent examples will show usage of the SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1, not necessarily CL_BCS (e.g. check this <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/display/Snippets/ABAP-SendingGOSattachmentstoanemailaddress" target="_newWindow">Wiki entry</a>).<br />

<br />

In my opinion this is a very good example showing the noise level and amount of documentation out there. The latter has the natural tendency to be outdated and obviously on SDN this is no different. I don't think there is any working approach yet on keeping documentation up-to-date (and probably will never exist).<br />

<br />

So best option would be to place in a prominent place the reference to CL_BCS and the existing sample programs from SAP or other SDN content. I suspect that this is what you actually meant...<br />

<br />

<div class="jive-quote">

The ultimate control would be to add the names off all unreleased function modules to the SDN content filters... :-)<br />

</div>

Hhmm, I guess by <i>ultimate control</i> you're referring to the <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four" target="_newWindow">1984</a> concept... ;-)<br />

<br />

I'd say no ABAP developer would honestly consider omitting usage of unreleased objects (as often our work starts when the functional guys surrendered and now the developers have to make the impossible possible). Essentially unreleased just means that there's no stable interface, behavior guarantee or support from SAP. However, for many objects it's clear when looking at how SAP used them that the objects <i>must be fairly stable</i>, because any non-backwards compatible changes would also require SAP to adjust lots of coding.<br />

<br />

Thus a very suitable topic for the developer forums and I'm sure that most seasoned developers would immediately sign off on using unreleased objects (in general, though carefully looking at each individual instance).<br />

<br />

Ok, admittedly my comment was a bit too serious, but I just want to make sure that the non-technical folks reading this don't get the wrong impression...

[Former Member]

I agree with you about adding it centrally to Matt's "Do not ask date questions" thread as a sticky - that is also what I meant.

> I just want to make sure that the non-technical folks reading this don't get the wrong impression...

Nor should they be given a "fluffy right impression" about obsolete and unreleased FM's. Definately a topic for so called "BPXers" as well.

Cheers,

Julius

[matt]

Perhaps we should add - any questions of the type: how do I use this BAPI...

[Former Member]

Hi Sandra,

I'm personally grappling for quite a while with the noise level in the forums and wonder why sometimes the phrase expert forums resurfaces. It's clearly a general and open forum and as far as I can tell there's no initiative to ensure a certain knowledge level for postings. What I can see though is the attempt to stop people from posting, who never even bother to put in an iota of thought/research themselves.

Though I'd like to get my daily condensed pearls of wisdom from the forums, this is probably just wishful thinking. Actually I don't mind reading and answering any beginner questions now and then, because we all had to start at some point. As long as I get enough interesting posts, I'd say this is acceptable. Furthermore we should also take into account that searching for information is a tough task as there's lots of endless pseudo-technical marketing-infested documentation or questionable/wrong information out there (e.g. lots of nonsense in the forum postings).

However, I despise posters who don't show any effort at all on their side, refusing to follow documentation hints and insisting on sample coding etc. In the olden days with mailing lists and use groups this seemed to work much better. Maybe because it was smaller communities, but there you'd see a quick RFTM for silly questions and no further comment. On SDN I think we have quite a few highscore junkies who seem to be willing to answer anything, which contributes to noise level.

In the end I think we all want the guru sitting next to us and patiently answering all our questions?! So I'd say, let's try to keep the noise level down, but not by discouraging any postings with certain keywords and instead cutting off the ones, who lack any initiative to figure out stuff by themselves first (I don't care though if there's some who just ask questions, but never answer as long as their questions are reasonable).

Cheers, harald

p.s.: I would like to see an experiment, where postings are no longer rewarded, which should deter at least a few people who are not here for the content. I feel nauseated by the request for points in the comments of the [SCN satisfaction survey|http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/weblogs?blog=/pub/wlg/18418] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken]; or similar requests in the forums. I'd have no problem banning such users.

[Sandra_Rossi]

thank you for all your great comments. Well I thought I had not opened the Pandora's box, it was already opened with the date topic and probably discussed a lot.

Harald, your arguments are very good, I understand the precautions that need to be taken.

Maybe the question is how to depollute the forum, especially when searching. For example, threads that refer to another thread could be omitted when searched. To achieve that, a new field could be added in the reply page where we enter the thread number (or wiki or blog or other), and if this reply is marked solved, then this thread would be excluded, and the referenced link would be included in the search result...

About SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1, maybe I could create a FAQ page for answering basic questions, and maybe provide a little program which analyzes parameters passed to SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1 (like the consistency check for ALVs)...

[OttoGold]

• THUMBS UP! *

this FM is a nightmare for every user of the forum. I second anything Sandra will suggest:)) Otto

[moshenaveh]

Hi,

Please let me know if you need any help in creating such a FAQ page in the SCN Wiki.

Also feel free to post questions at our [Expert Wiki Editors|; forum.

[Sandra_Rossi]

> About SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1, maybe I could create a FAQ page for answering basic questions,

Done: [Sending Mails - Home Page|http://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/display/ABAP/SendingMails-HomePage]

> and maybe provide a little program which analyzes parameters passed to SO_DOCUMENT_SEND_API1 (like the consistency check for ALVs)...

No time to do it, I give up

Maybe I'll explain in the wiki how parameters work (especially: relationships between parameters + how to store bytes in CONTENT_BIN text parameter within Unicode and Non-Unicode systems)