Default Business Rules at AppSet level

Hi Experts,
Once you create a new AppSet by copying AppShell and add a "Consolidation" type application with all business rules, a default "Business Rules Library" is generated at AppSet level along with "Business Rule" within Application. The "Business Rules Library" at AppSet level includes "Consolidation Rules" and "Consolidation Methods". In my BPC 7.5 MS SP04 these default business rules table is empty, whereas it used to come with values pre-filled in it in earlier versions. I discussed this with one of the BPC NW consultant and he confirmed that for BPC 7.5 NW this issue was there that those values were there on backend but was not visible from the frontend Admin Console. After applying some patch in BPC 7.5 NW, it becomes visible in Admin Console Business Rules Library at AppSet level.
Can anybody using BPC 7.5 MS version confirm whether they are getting these values by default or they are entering it manually.
Edited by: Amitkumar Shyamanand on Jan 25, 2011 11:18 AM

You may need to confirm with SAP Support, but I beleive that the latest versions of 7.5 on Microsoft has a very slimmed down version of AppShell, and that the business rules are not included in the process. Best if you get an Appshell from version 7 and create you copy which will then have all the Appset Business RUles.
Hope this helps.

Similar Messages

How to apply business rule over report level

Hi All,
I have a column name AAA over which i have to apply a business rule/filter like
COUNT(“X Fact”." ID") WHEN “X Fact”.”Time to Issue Policy” <= 2 days at report level.How to apply that?any idea?
Regards,
Sonal

Hi,
Thanks for responce.
Yes my AAA col is measure column coming frm Order Fact table (i.e AAA= "Order Fact"."Number of Order") & below is Business rule which I have to apply there
COUNT(“Order Fact”."Order ID") WHEN “Order Fact”.”Time to Order” <= 3 days.How Can I apply this logic there at report level.Plz help?
Regards,
Sonal

Dynamic filename in Business Rules

Hi,
I would like to use the DataExport command in my business rules to extract level-0 data in a file as a reference for user. I would need to extract data only for Entities that a user has access to (I figured that I could use parameters, link the rule to a Planning form and use "members" on form).
My problem is that I would need a different filename for each execution. Something like :
..\userABC_20090513_100350_BV_SBQ.txt
..\userDEF_20090513_100430_BV_SLVQ.txt
Is there a way, in business rules, to find the following info ?
- the user who is currently running the rule.
- the current date.
- the current time.
If not, is there a way to include a shell in a business rule. I have a small .exe that return the date or time as an "errorlevel" code that I could use if I can call a shell in the rule.
Finally, a theorical question : is there an other way to ensure that only the user who run the rule can access the generated file (always while using business rules) ?
Thanks

First, in a well designed data model, I'm not sure I see the need for data validation logic to change regularly. If a particular column cannot be NULL today, it would be rather unlikely that it would somehow need to be NULL tomorrow.
Second, I'm not sure I see what this approach buys you over the much simpler approach of adding and removing check constraints if the data model changes. Adding and removing a constraint is pretty trivial-- orders of magnitude less difficult than doing the analysis to determine what constraint needs to change and what impact that has downstream.
Third, I would suspect that if you need to encode these sorts of constrains in a table, your system will kill downstream systems with regularity. If p1 is NOT NULL today, but tomorrow it suddenly allows NULL values, a consumer application might well break (or worse, silently return incorrect results). Data changes should not be able to screw up downstream systems.
Fourth, if you did build such a system, you would have to build your own constraint validator, rather than being able to rely on Oracle's (unless you wrote code to create and drop Oracle constraints based on values in a table, but that seems rather convoluted). Given that Oracle's constraint validation engine is highly optimmized and highly accurate, a home grown engine isn't going to look particularly good in comparison.
Justin
Distributed Database Consulting, Inc.
http://www.ddbcinc.com/askDDBC

Essbase parent level aggregation business rule for end users

Can someone provide me the basic syntax of a business rule to allow end users within Planning to run a run time prompt business to aggregate their responsibility level within a dimension like Cost Center? So for example, I want to allow a cost center manager to pick his parent level cost center and then run the aggregation script to rollup only his cost center expenses. I've tried to include AGG and CalcDim commands with various global variables to enable them to select the cost center fix point, but the aggregation doesn't seem to produce the right results. Anyone have a workable syntax for this?

If you are just trying to agg the children up to the parent it is even simplier I'll assume you are trying to roll up the company to some intermediate level
Say you have the outline
company
---East
------NY
-----NJ
---West
-----Ca
-----Az
and you want to roll up East you could do something like
FIX (FY10, Final, Actual)
@IDESCENDANTS("East");
ENDFIX
Of course I would add more into the fix to do the least work possible
The command Idescendants really means calculate all of the descendants of the selected member. I guess if you wanted to make it more efficient you could add the level command into it
like @idescendants("East"",-1) that would avoid looking for anything to do on the level zero members

DataExport in Business Rules

Hi,
is there a way to make the DataExport calcscript command works in Business Rules ?
I made the script below to export data in a calcscript and it works fine.
//ESS_LOCALE French_France.MS1252@Default
SET DATAEXPORTOPTIONS
DataExportLevel "LEVEL0";
DataExportRelationalFile ON;
DataExportOverwriteFile ON;
DataExportDecimal 2;
DATAEXPORTDIMHEADER OFF;
FIX ("Probables", "FY08","Officielle",@RELATIVE("E23",0));
DATAEXPORT "File" "," "D:\Hyperion\AnalyticServices_LTQuebec\APP\LTQuebec\Finance\Dump_Data\TestBV_SBQ.txt" "#MI";
ENDFIX;
The main objective is to have a level-0 file of all data for a specific version, scenario, year and entity. This file will be used (after modification like inluding alias and comments from Planning) as a reference by users.
Now, I would like to move it in a business rule to be able to pass parameters from a Planning form.
In my example "E23" is an entity and I would like it to change to follow user security in Planning (user will not be able to choose other entity than those they can access in Planning).
I tried to do it in a report but it is too slow as we have 12 dimensions, 3 of them having more than 1000 members.
Is anybody did something similar before (using DataExport or another method) ?
Thanks

Hi John,
my problem is not with DataExport performance, which is really fast (5 seconds or less). We have only level-0 members included in the export and none currently has dynamic calc.
The performance issue is with reports that take a long time to generate as we have 1000+ Activity * 1000+ Products * 1000+ Sectors so, basically 1,000,000,000 cells * the numbers of entities included. Last time I ran my test report, it ran for 6 hours before I killed it. Even with "Suppress Missing", it seems to try to extract all data first and remove missing after.
This is why we changed to DataExport, which is more efficient. But the fact that DataExport seems to be unrecognized by business rules cause me the problem that I can't use parameters and users will be able to see entities that are not their own (unless I create 200 scripts, one for each users, which will not really be a solution).
Thanks

Solving "COMMIT business rules" on the database server

Headstart Oracle Designer related white paper
"CDM RuleFrame Overview: 6 Reasons to get Framed"
(at //otn.oracle.com/products/headstart/content.html) says:
"For a number of business rules it is not possible to implement these in the server
using traditional check constraints and database triggers. Below you can find two examples:
Example rule 1: An Order must have at least one Order Line ..."
But, one method exists that allows solving "COMMIT rules" completely on the database level.
That method consists of the possibility of delaying the checking of the declarative constraints (NOT NULL, Primary Key, Unique Key, Foreign Key, Check Constraints) until the commit
(that method was introduced first in the version 8.0.).
E.g. we add the field "num_emps" to the DEPT table, which always has the value of the number
of the belonging EMP rows and add DEFERRED CK which uses the values from that field:
ALTER TABLE dept ADD num_emps NUMBER DEFAULT 0 NOT NULL
UPDATE dept
SET num_emps = (SELECT COUNT (*) FROM emp WHERE emp.deptno = dept.deptno)
DELETE dept WHERE num_emps = 0
ALTER TABLE dept ADD CONSTRAINT dept_num_emps_ck CHECK (num_emps > 0) INITIALLY DEFERRED
Triggers that insure the solving of the server side "COMMIT rules" are fairly simple.
We need a packed variable that is set and reset in the EMP triggers and those value
is read in the bur_dept trigger (of course, we could have place the variable in the package
specification and change/read it directly, thus not needing the package body,
but this is a "cleaner" way to do it):
CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE pack IS
PROCEDURE set_flag;
PROCEDURE reset_flag;
FUNCTION dml_from_emp RETURN BOOLEAN;
END;
CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE BODY pack IS
m_dml_from_emp BOOLEAN := FALSE;
PROCEDURE set_flag IS
BEGIN
m_dml_from_emp := TRUE;
END;
PROCEDURE reset_flag IS
BEGIN
m_dml_from_emp := FALSE;
END;
FUNCTION dml_from_emp RETURN BOOLEAN IS
BEGIN
RETURN m_dml_from_emp;
END;
END;
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER bir_dept
BEFORE INSERT ON dept
FOR EACH ROW
BEGIN
:NEW.num_emps := 0;
END;
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER bur_dept
BEFORE UPDATE ON dept
FOR EACH ROW
BEGIN
IF :OLD.deptno <> :NEW.deptno THEN
RAISE_APPLICATION_ERROR (-20001, 'Can''t change deptno in DEPT!');
END IF;
-- only EMP trigger can change "num_emps" column
IF NOT pack.dml_from_emp THEN
:NEW.num_emps := :OLD.num_emps;
END IF;
END;
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER air_emp
AFTER INSERT ON emp
FOR EACH ROW
BEGIN
pack.set_flag;
UPDATE dept
SET num_emps = num_emps + 1
WHERE deptno = :NEW.deptno;
pack.reset_flag;
END;
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER aur_emp
AFTER UPDATE ON emp
FOR EACH ROW
BEGIN
IF NVL (:OLD.deptno, 0) <> NVL (:NEW.deptno, 0) THEN
pack.set_flag;
UPDATE dept
SET num_emps = num_emps - 1
WHERE deptno = :OLD.deptno;
UPDATE dept
SET num_emps = num_emps + 1
WHERE deptno = :NEW.deptno;
pack.reset_flag;
END IF;
END;
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER adr_emp
AFTER DELETE ON emp
FOR EACH ROW
BEGIN
pack.set_flag;
UPDATE dept
SET num_emps = num_emps - 1
WHERE deptno = :OLD.deptno;
pack.reset_flag;
END;
If we insert a new DEPT without the belonging EMP, or delete all EMPs belonging to a certain DEPT, or move all EMPs of a certain DEPT, when the COMMIT is issued we get the following error:
ORA-02091: transaction rolled back
ORA-02290: check constraint (SCOTT.DEPT_NUM_EMPS_CK) violated
Disvantage is that one "auxiliary" column is (mostly) needed for each "COMMIT rule".
If we'd like to add another "COMMIT rule" to the DEPT table, like:
"SUM (sal) FROM emp WHERE deptno = p_deptno must be <= p_max_dept_sal"
we would have to add another column, like "dept_sal".
CDM RuleFrame advantage is that it does not force us to add "auxiliary" columns.
We must emphasize that in real life we would not write PL/SQL code directly in the database triggers, but in packages, nor would we directly use RAISE_APPLICATION_ERROR.
It is written this way in this sample only for the code clarity purpose.
Regards
Zlatko Sirotic

Zlatko,
You are right, your method is a way to implement "COMMIT rules" completely on the database level.
As you said yourself, disadvantage is that you need an extra column for each such rule,
while with CDM RuleFrame this is not necessary.
A few remarks:
- By adding an auxiliary column (like NUM_EMPS in the DEPT table) for each "COMMIT rule",
you effectively change the type of the rule from Dynamic (depending on the type of operation)
to a combination of Change Event (for updating NUM_EMPS) and Static (deferred check constraint on NUM_EMPS).
- Deferred database constraints have the following disadvantages:
When something goes wrong within the transaction, then the complete transaction is rolled back, not just the piece that went
wrong. Therefore, it becomes more important to use appropriate commit units.
There is no report of the exact row responsible for the violation nor are further violations either by other rows or of other
constraints reported.
If you use Oracle Forms as a front end application, the errors raised from deferred constraints are not handled very well.
- CDM discourages the use of check constraints. One of the reasons is, that when all tuple rules are placed in the CAPI,
any violations can be reported at the end of the transaction level together with all other rule violations.
A violated check constraint would abort the transaction right away, without the possibility of reporting back other rule violations.
So I think your tip is a good alternative if for some reason you cannot use CDM RuleFrame,
but you'd miss out on all the other advantages of RuleFrame that are mentioned in the paper!
kind regards, Sandra

Business rules to implement - BEST way - triggers and mutating table

I have the following table where it has Foreign Key defined on itself(self reference for parent_id column which can be null or valid site_id)
create table test_virtual_site
site_id number CONSTRAINT site_id_pk primary key,
parent_id number CONSTRAINT parent_site_id_unq UNIQUE ,
closed_date date default NULL ,
CONSTRAINT check_self_ref CHECK(parent_site_id <> site_id), --avoid self refernce
CONSTRAINT check_valid_site foreign key(parent_site_id) references test_virtual_site(site_id)
I have the following business rules to implement and my problem is related to their implementation
1)     A check should be made that Site_id specified as parent_id should not be a child of any other store (parent should have its parent_id column as NULL)
Site_id Parent_id
1
2 1
3 2 =>NOT VALID 2 is a child of another store
2)     Parent is not closed
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1 10-May-2005
3     1 =>NOT VALID 1 is a closed
3)
when parent store is closed - updated so at closed_date is not null
Want to set the parent_id as NULL for the child store.
OR
SET the closed_date for child store too same as the parent_store.
Example
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1
1 2
Update test_virtual_site
SET closed_date = sysdate
Where site_id = 1 ;
Through Trigger
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1     22-Mar-06
1 2 22-Mar-06
OR
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1     22-Mar-06
1
When I am trying to do the above mentioned through constraints I am running into mutating trigger problem. Can you please guide me what is the best way to handle the above-mentioned scenarios.
I am aware that I can avoid the 3rd problem using the following
-- - Initialize an array in the before statement trigger.
-- - Add the processed rowid to the array in the after row
-- trigger.
-- - In the after statement trigger: get each rowid from the
-- array and process it. When all rowids are processed, clear
-- the array.
BUT for 1 and 2 I need to look at the parent specified , the parent exists in the same table BUT I can not perform the lookup from the BEFORE INSERT ROW LEVEL trigger but I want to ensure at the row level , so if the parent store is closed or parent specifed itself is a child(not permissible) I want to rollback the insert RAISE_APPLICATION_ERROR.
Can you please guide me what is the best way to handle the above mentioned conditions .

I have the following table where it has Foreign Key defined on itself(self reference for parent_id column which can be null or valid site_id)
create table test_virtual_site
site_id number CONSTRAINT site_id_pk primary key,
parent_id number CONSTRAINT parent_site_id_unq UNIQUE ,
closed_date date default NULL ,
CONSTRAINT check_self_ref CHECK(parent_site_id <> site_id), --avoid self refernce
CONSTRAINT check_valid_site foreign key(parent_site_id) references test_virtual_site(site_id)
I have the following business rules to implement and my problem is related to their implementation
1)     A check should be made that Site_id specified as parent_id should not be a child of any other store (parent should have its parent_id column as NULL)
Site_id Parent_id
1
2 1
3 2 =>NOT VALID 2 is a child of another store
2)     Parent is not closed
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1 10-May-2005
3     1 =>NOT VALID 1 is a closed
3)
when parent store is closed - updated so at closed_date is not null
Want to set the parent_id as NULL for the child store.
OR
SET the closed_date for child store too same as the parent_store.
Example
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1
1 2
Update test_virtual_site
SET closed_date = sysdate
Where site_id = 1 ;
Through Trigger
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1     22-Mar-06
1 2 22-Mar-06
OR
Site_id Parent_id Closed_date
1     22-Mar-06
1
When I am trying to do the above mentioned through constraints I am running into mutating trigger problem. Can you please guide me what is the best way to handle the above-mentioned scenarios.
I am aware that I can avoid the 3rd problem using the following
-- - Initialize an array in the before statement trigger.
-- - Add the processed rowid to the array in the after row
-- trigger.
-- - In the after statement trigger: get each rowid from the
-- array and process it. When all rowids are processed, clear
-- the array.
BUT for 1 and 2 I need to look at the parent specified , the parent exists in the same table BUT I can not perform the lookup from the BEFORE INSERT ROW LEVEL trigger but I want to ensure at the row level , so if the parent store is closed or parent specifed itself is a child(not permissible) I want to rollback the insert RAISE_APPLICATION_ERROR.
Can you please guide me what is the best way to handle the above mentioned conditions .

Business rule - cannot run

Gurus,
I cannot launch a business rule. When I try to launch it, it gives a message "the rule cannot be launched because it has hidden rtp variables without default value"
What could be he problem with it.
THANKS

Maybe it relates to the issue
9900514 - "The Use Members on Data Form and Hide Prompt options for business rules attached to composite data forms apply only for runtime prompt values from the globally shared pages and POVs of a composite data form. In other words, this will only use members that are shared across all component data forms. If users want a business rule to take context from a single component data form, they should attach the business rule to that component data form and include the business rules for that component data form at the composite data form level (<Business rules for componentX>)."
Cheers
John
http://john-goodwin.blogspot.com/

Business Rule Library not activated

Hi, can anyone please tell me what drives the activation of Business Rule library?I am currently working on Consolidation of Investments and I have configured the dimension properties, application parameters as stated in 340.But my businessrules librray is not activated and hence I am not able to define the rules of consolidation.
Edited by: 281642 on Aug 30, 2011 6:32 AM

Hi,
Which business rules have you selected?
The business rules at the appset level are visible only if the automatic adjustment business rule is selected in your application.
Hope this helps.

RTP not working with Business Rule

I am trying to create a buisness rule that fixes on a member in a custom dimension based on a run time prompt using Calc Manger (11.1.2.2). I created the variable at the cube level, set it to 'Member' and selected the appropriate dimension, and selected RTP. The FIX statement is very simple FIX("Current",{Contract}). The rule validates and deploys with no problem. When running the rule either on form save or through Business Rules I receive the error: "error parsing formula for [FIX STATEMENT] (line 2): invalid object type. If I change the variable to uncheck 'RTP' and place the same member used previously as the Default value the rule runs no problem. Is there any reason why the rule appears to not be able to read in my RTP selection?
Thanks,
CS

Though this is not a calc manager issue, I am sure the member that Planning is picking up is a member that is set tyo dynamic calc.
You cannot use a member that is set to dynamic calc in a fix.
-Sree Menon

Hyperion Business rules

HI All,
The scenario is such that I have two set of data forms.
One is for monthly level budgeting and the other set of forms is for Yearly budgeting data.
Now, when I punch the data into the Yearly values, it has to evenly distributed into the monthly forms.
Ex: When I punch 120 in FY11, then it has to be divided by 12 and set 10 for Jan, 10 for Feb and so on and so forth.
Thanks All

This is the default behaviour of Hyperion Planning distribution. You should enable distribution in the form design and place the period dimension as Ilevel0descendants(YearTotal) to column. If you have already set even distribution (not 4-4-5 or 4-5-4) then the data you input on YearTotal gets distributed to months evenly. Therefore you wouldn't need to write a business rule for this.
Cheers,
Alp

Running Business Rules with global Variables in Composite Forms

Hi,
I am having trouble running Business Rules, that include Global Variables, in composite forms.
I have two forms in the composite form, both have entity in Page dimension set to 'local'. one includes entities at level 3 and the other has entities at level 0. I need to pass this level 0 entity to the business rule, from the form.
When i try to run the rule, it gives me the following error:
"This rule cannot be launched because it has hidden rtp variables without default values "
I get this error even when i set the default value for the global variable.
This rule runs perfectly when run from the individual form (which is part of the composite form).
Please help.
Thanks.

Known Issue: 9900514
The Use Members on Data Form and Hide Prompt options for business rules attached to composite data forms apply only for runtime prompt values from the globally shared pages and POVs of a composite data form. In other words, this will only use members that are shared across all component data forms. If users want a business rule to take context from a single component data form, they should attach the business rule to that component data form and include the business rules for that component data form at the composite data form level (<Business rules for componentX>).
Please let me know if this is not what we are talking about.
Thank you,
Todd Rebner

Expose Business Rules as composite service - ORAMED-03303 on call

Hi folks,
I'm on 11g PS2 and Jdeveloper 11.1.1.3.0 with Oracle SOA Composite Editor 11.1.1.3.0.25.57
The problem: I get ORAMED exception when I call the business rule through its automagically created web service endpoint
Among the many things which I've tried and didn't work:
- create my own web service end point for the business process
- turn on WS Addr for the web service end point
The payload and returned fault are as follows:
<messages>
<input>
<Invoke_ruleBlacklist_callFunctionStateless_InputVariable>
<part name="payload">
<ns0:callFunctionStateless name="processRequest">
<bpelInstance>
<processId>processRequest</processId>
<processVersion>1.0</processVersion>
<domainId/>
<processURL>http://localhost:8001/soa-infra/services/default/TestInitiateProcess!1.0*soa_e2ef0cb6-2dbe-4047-96e3-7a8edff9fc16</processURL>
<instanceId>70002</instanceId>
</bpelInstance>
<parameterList>
<BlacklistRuleInput>
<party>
<partyId>string</partyId>
<partyOrganisation>string</partyOrganisation>
<partyName>string</partyName>
</party>
</BlacklistRuleInput>
</parameterList>
</ns0:callFunctionStateless>
</part>
</Invoke_ruleBlacklist_callFunctionStateless_InputVariable>
</input>
<fault>
<bpelFault>
<faultType>0</faultType>
<operationErroredFault>
<part name="payload">
<errorInfo>
<errorMessage>TestBusinessRules</errorMessage>
</errorInfo>
</part>
</operationErroredFault>
</bpelFault>
</fault>
<faultType>
<message>0</message>
</faultType>
</messages>
__Steps to reproduce:__
Create a new project, add simple business rule, tick 'expose as composite service'. A Web service endpoint is automagically created
To another project:
- add a web service reference to the business rule ws endpoint
- add an Assign and Invoke activity within BPEL towards the business rule
Thanks in advance for reading and appreciate your guidance please

Hi there jeem,
I'm having a world of trouble with that same Rules composite example, the OrderApproval one. I've deployed it, and can invoke it, and yet get the following error each time I invoke it:
HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error
Content-Type: text/xml; charset=UTF-8
X-Powered-By: Servlet/2.5 JSP/2.1
SOAPAction: ""
Content-Length: 546
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 03:36:22 GMT
X-ORACLE-DMS-ECID: 0000If6Dsbg0FwI5yrDCiW1CV7Dc0000A1
X-HTTPAnalyzer-RuleName: Pass through :
<env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
<env:Header/>
<env:Body>
<env:Fault xmlns:fpre="http://xmlns.oracle.com/OracleRules1/OracleRules1_DecisionService_1">
<faultcode>fpre:operationErroredFault</faultcode>
<faultstring/>
<faultactor/>
<detail>
<errorInfo xmlns="http://xmlns.oracle.com/OracleRules1/OracleRules1_DecisionService_1">
<errorMessage>default/OrderApproval!1.6*soa_5acae7d5-9fcf-4620-a9aa-8fb621faaf0d/OracleRules1</errorMessage>
</errorInfo>
</detail>
</env:Fault>
</env:Body>
</env:Envelope>
I've tried specifying the name attribute (I'm using "OracleRules1_DecisionService_1" for this) against the callFunctionStateless element, but am still getting this error!
Can you yourself, jeer, or anyone else please help with this? I've turned on low level logging for the soa server, but the errors it's throwing really don't enlighten me very much at all!
Any help will be very much appreciated.
Regards,
Rhian

Business Rule calc manager issue while executing through Planning Smartview

Hi,
I am working on Hyperion Planning 11.1.2 and I have created few business rule in Calc manager. When user is opening it through Hyperion Planning webforms its working fine.
I have attached the rules on webform and they run on Save and use member on data form and Hide prompts.
All these properties are checked. So user enter the number on Planning webform and hit on save rule will cruch on the POV members.
Please help me on below 2 issues:
1.When user is using the Smartview Planning and opening webform in Smartview while exceuting the rule its throwing error. Can't run the rule.
What is the exact provsiong I need to give so that they can execute it from the Hyperion Smartview Planning also.
Currently HBRAPP is Interactive user
and Application level is Interactive user and Essbase write access
If I am giving Administrator access they are bale to run the rule, I can't give Administartor acess.
2.While running rule even with admin access its not taking the POV, its taking the default mebers which I have given while creating the variables.
However from Planning web it takes the POV selection of webform,
Please suggest why the same thing is not happening from Hyperion Smartview.
Thanks in advance
Pankaj

Please advise on this issue. Any help would be highly appreciated.

Possible to Have ToC Default to Show Only Top Level (collapse sublevels)?

Howdy!
I'll bet I'm not the only one wishing for this. Let's say you're using Captivate 4's Table of Contents feature with a longish movie of Cp slides, which is chunked into bite-size sections content-wise. In the ToC, though, you can't mimic that same organization scheme; at least, the learner would first need to collapse all the ToC folders you've created so they see only the top-level listing.
This can be a critical issue: keeping the at-first-glance list in the ToC brief enough to be inviting to learners, yet allowing learners to drive which details are currently visible.
A movie's topical hierarchy could be along these lines, for example ...
Section 1 - National Brands
What are National Brands?
Why Are They Important to Our Business?
Working with Nat. Brands
Practice Your Knowledge
Section 2 - International Brands
What are International Brands?
Why Are They Important to Our Business?
Working with Intl. Brands
Practice Your Knowledge
You'd like to organize the ToC to show only the section titles (1st level) and to suppress the 2nd-level detail (slide titles) until the learner chooses to expand the folder to see those details.
I've tried things like grouping the slides into sections in the Storyboard view and organizing the slides into sections strictly within the ToC -- both to no avail.
Has anyone solved for this need yet?
I'm all ears, and you'd be doing learners of the world a huge favor.
Thanks!

Hi, Jim.
Thanks for being 'on the case' and looking into this so quickly. Your
findings are encouraging, although my user base is generally working with
IE 6 and FP8 or 9.
Since the only thing I may influence is getting IT to help push out FP10,
I'm hoping it's more of a player- than a browser-version issue.
I'll test things out by Monday and let you know the results. Wish me luck!
Dave
                                                                                From:       Jim Leichliter <[email protected]>
To:         Dave Tressler <[email protected]>
Date:       03/26/2010 06:02 PM
Subject:    Possible to Have ToC Default to Show Only Top Level (collapse
              sublevels)?
Dave,
I just tested this on my local web server and it worked fine. I created a
blank project with 8 slides. Created my TOC with grouping... 2 slides in
each group. I turned on self paced learning. I tried with and without the
widget and it picked up where I left off in either case. See
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B86WuEq6SVwRNWIwMjhjODctMjE2Yy00MWE2LWI5YzEtMGQxYzNjOWQ0Z mI2&hl=en.
I published using FP10 and IE8 to view. Notice any difference between
your project and this one?
Thanks,
Jim Leichliter

Default Business Rules at AppSet level

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for