Modify the field TXJCD_ST of RFC_CALCULATE_TAXES_DOC

HI,
I have a requirements to modify the field TXJCD_ST of RFC_CALCULATE_TAXES_DOC with the ShipTo jurisdiction code.
What i found is the user exit exit_saplfytx_user_001 that sends to the RFC a list of fields that are modified. The field TXJCD_ST is not in the list of the user exit.
At this point i don't know how to do it , meaning pass the modified value of the TXJCD_ST to the RFC_CALCULATE_TAXES_DOC.
Does anyone know how to?
Regards, Oli

No, I did not see this particular scenario yet. If the Taxware guys say they can not configure their side like that, then this won't work. I just thought they could be able to do this because they can configure the structure of the USER_DATA field on their end. It is entirely possible that those fields that are explicitely part of the interface can not be added to USER_DATA.
You can still try my first suggestion
I wonder if that'll work. Theoretically it should since by looking at the related code and backtracking the calls, it looks like MOVE-CORRESPONDING statements are used - so having the TXJCD_ST as part of the allowed fields might just work OK.

Similar Messages

Modify the Field Type of standard Table fields in a Query

Hello. I have a question.
Is there a way to "modify" the field type for standard table fields that are included in a Query?
I made a simple query out of a join of tables, but several fields have a lot of decimals, and I would like to present them in the query without any decimals, just as a regular "N" field.
I tried the possibility of creating extra local fields where all I do is transfer the value to the new "N" field, but I have many fields like this, so if there's a better way; I'd prefer that.
Maybe somewhere in the InfoSet there's a way to modify the type of the standard table fields?
Thank you.

Hi,
This document may help you out.
[http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60_sp/helpdata/en/d2/cb4468455611d189710000e8322d00/frameset.htm|http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60_sp/helpdata/en/d2/cb4468455611d189710000e8322d00/frameset.htm]
Cheers,

Problem to modify the field "location" in an AP on WCS

Hello everybody,
I have a problem to modify the field "location" in an access point on WCS.
In fact, when i try to modify this field and then apply the modification, i have this error message :
"Error(s): You must correct the following error(s) before proceeding:
Error:Global Username and Password are not configured on the associated controller. Please configure username and password on the associated controller before disabling 'Override Global Username Password'."
I made the modification on Chrome and Firefox but I always have the error message.
Nevertheless, i don't have this error message with other access points and other access points are configured without the option "Override Global Username Password".
I'm obliged to make the modification directly in the controller and not in WCS.
The problem is that i want to make the modification directly in WCS.
Could you help me please ?
Thank you in advance.

When i make the modification directly in WCS, i have no problem, it syncs good.
The version of WCS is 7.0.230.0.
The version of the controller is 7.0.240.0 and the field recovery image version is 7.0.112.21.
Version
7.0.230.0
Version
7.0.230.0
Version
7.0.230.0

How to modify the field lengh of file upload

Hi All,
   I am facing a problem with u201Cuploadu201D filed length in BSP application.
When we upload the file in BSP page, the path displayed should be the full path (i.e. from where the file is being upload the file)
Now this field is appearing 20 char length
Now I want to increase the length of the upload field (Input field) to be 100 char so that the path is visible.
In the current application the file upload is being done through a structure (attributes)
In this structure the fields are like this
PAGE_NAME
ID
FOR
TAGS
ROW_INDEX
COLUMN_INDEX
OTR_NAME
REQUIRED_NAME
MAXLENGTH
SIZE
TABLE_NAME
ON_SELECT
VALUE
DISABLED
ONCLICK
TEXT
TYPE
Using this method:
CALL METHOD cl_htmlb_fileupload=>factory
          EXPORTING
            Id      = ls_form_save-id
          RECEIVING
            Element = lv_fileup.
        bee_table->add ( level = 2 element = lv_fileup ).
This cl_htmlb_fileupload is named as class interface.
Which has the CLG_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD (it is a class) it is defined in attributes.
In this class it has the attribute u201CSIZEu201D by default string 20.
Now I need to change this attribute length from 20 to 100
For this I copied the standard class CL_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD into ZCL_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD.
This ZCL_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD contains all attributes of the standard class CL_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD
Including the one class (CLG_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD), this is defined as an attribute (ABOVE MENTIONED?)
This class is appearing in non editable mode, so   I have copied this class into zclass (ZCLG_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD).but still I am not able to edit the attribute called u201Csizeu201D
And also I am not bale to add the zclass in place of the ZCLG_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD
Kindly tell me how to modify the length of the field u201Csize u201Cand also how to add the zclass in the attributes of one class (syntax)
Thanks in advance
Rambabu.A

Hi,
Class CLG_HTMLB_FILEUPLOAD is a class automatically generated when a BSP Element is created. You should not change/create such a class, unless by creating your own BSP Element.
As per your requirement, you can use the SIZE parameter of method factory:
ls_form_save-size = '100'.
CALL METHOD cl_htmlb_fileupload=>factory
EXPORTING
Id = ls_form_save-id
Size = ls_form_save-size
RECEIVING
Element = lv_fileup.
Regards,
Tanguy

Modify the field value in itab1 using itab2

Hi experts
I need some help.
My question is : I have ITAB1 contains IBLNO field it is a legacy value.
I want to modify this field.
Another internal table ITAB2 contains sap, legacy value of IBLNO(Cross refrenced table).my requirement is IBLNO of ITAB1 is modified with corresponding sap IBLNO in ITAB2.
plz help
Durga Parsad

Hi Durga,
You want to get following results -
1. You have ITAB1 containing IBLNO.
2. ITAB2 has IBLNO.
3. Modify ITAB1-IBLNO from ITAB2-IBLNO.
4. There must be some common value between the two tables. It has to be there otherwise the two records won't match.
Kindly find the following code for doing so -
LOOP AT ITAB2 INTO WA_ITAB2.
* Modify ITAB1 from workarea of ITAB2 for matching records
MODIFY ITAB1 FROM WA_ITAB2
    TRANSPORTING IBLNO                " Modify only IBLNO of ITAB1 for matching records
    WHERE FIELD1 = WA_ITAB2-FIELD1.   " Some common field between the ITAB1 & workarea of ITAB2
CLEAR WA_ITAB2.
ENDLOOP.
Hope this helps.
PS If the answer solves your query, plz close the thread by rewarding each reply and marking it Solved.
Regards

Modify the field u00AB Account u00BB in FB03 Transaction (ECC6)

Hello,
I have to modify the value of the field u201CAccountu201D in the general screen and in the item screen of the transaction FB03. (to put inside the alternative account)
I have tested all the user exit of the transaction but none is useful.
Then, u201CI_AUTHORITY_ITEMu201D is the only one BADI for the transaction, but it occurs too early in the program to change data.
Ie, with it I can change the field in the intern table (SAPLF064)XBSEG but this field is replaced with another value later in the process. And I canu2019t change this other value because of checks on it in the program.
Have you got any suggestion before I run the specific solution of the ZFB03 ?
Regards.

Alfred
Check BADI "ACC_DOCUMENT", it is filter dependent, so set the appropriate filter once you create the Implementation...
Thanks
Amol Lohade

FB01: "Posting with ref." slould I modify the field 'Assignment' by hand?

Hi All,
I'd like to post a document by t.code FB01 and using the function "post with reference".
When i save the new document, it takes the field 'Assignment' from the reference-document i've put in.
Should I modify it by hand before saving it?
Or ther's the way to obtain it in the right way automatically?
Thanks
Gandalf

Hi,
You need to change the required fields manually, before actually posting a document with a reference document.
More over, its better to simulate a document before saving(posting).
Regards,
Praisty

How to modify the field symbol

Hello Every1,
I have a internal table and field symbol with the below structure.
Data : begin of itab occurs 0,
           matnr like mara-matnr,
           ersda like mara-ersda,
       End   of itab.
FIELD-SYMBOLS: <Matnr>    TYPE STANDARD TABLE.
I have the field symbol with 10 records similar to the structure of itab. (Only matnr is populated and date as initial). Now I need to transfer the date value from itab to the field symbol for the matching matnr.
Please let me know how to do it.
Thanks,
Siva.

Sivaprakash,
To my knowledge, a field-symbol cannot hold values on its own. It refers to a field or a table and work directly with the values.
Your scenario cannot be achieved unless there is another internal table besides itab.
Create a field-symbol of type itab2 and compare matnr with itab-matnr.
If a record is found then move the date field to <fs>.
Your code may look like this.
loop at itab2 assigning <fs>.
   read table itab into wa_itab with key matnr = <fs>-matnr.
if sy-subrc = 0.
<fs>-date = wa_itab-date.
endif.
endloop
Thanks,

I can't modify the field MARC-LOSGR using the badi BADI_MATERIAL_REF

Hello!
I have to force a value in the field "lot size" (MARC-LOSGR) when the system extends automatically a material with the transaction CK40N.
I tried to use the badi BADI_MATERIAL_REF, wich seems to be perfect for this purpose, but it doesn't work: after the badi the system resets the field to its initial value.
What can I do?
Thank you

Dear Sauro
I've found this thread in the forum, and because I've the same problem (I need to set 1000 as default for marc-losgr) during creation/extension of a material, I'd like know how you solved your issue.
The BADI is called during CK11N and CK40N transaction, but even if I set the value in the right mode it's not saved on table MARC. Of course If I create manually the cost view by using MM01 the BADI works fine and the value is saved.
Thank-you in advance for cooperation.
Claudio
Ps: se vuoi puoi anche rispondere direttamente in italiano al mio indirizzo che trovi nei miei riferimenti. Grazie

Modifying the Field labels dynamically at runtime.

Hi,
Is it possible to change the field labels dynamically at runtime . My
requirement is when the user has to edit the quantity part ,he presses a fn key (F7 in my case ) that is displaying a new field with the old label (quantity ) and old qnty label should be changed dynamically to ' previous quantity ' .
Thanks For Your aniticpated responses.
Message was edited by:
Khaleel S.Mohammed

Have you added teh Label as a text field?
If you have done that, try replacing the label with a Input/Output type field in the display mode by selecting 'Output Only' in the attributes->Program Tab of Screen Painter.
Now from the program , when the user presses F7, you can code to change the value of the Label (Input / Output field).
This will work out. Please let me know if you have any issues.
Regards,
Anish Thomas

How to modify the field VBAP-FIXMG

Hello All,
I have the value of VBELN and POSNR.
I have to mofdify the value of field VBAP-FIXMG on the basis of VBELN and POSNR.
Can u plz provide a solution for that.
Bapi is also possible.
if yes then plz provide name and exporting parameter.
thanks.

Hi
Try to use BAPI BAPI_SALESORDER_CHANGE:
Field FIXDAT_QTY of parameter ORDER_ITEM_IN
Max

How can i modify the field on standard vbak table

Hi Experts,
I have to change the flag of (vbak-faksk) vbak table from 23 to 24 for selected records.how can i include the bdc program here in my logic.
thanks
suri.

Table control in BDC
http://www.sap-img.com/abap/bdc-example-using-table-control-in-bdc.htm
BDC
http://www.sap-img.com/bdc.htm
Rewards if useful..............
Minal

IS IT POSSIBLE TO MANAGE AUTHORITY TO MODIFY A FIELD INTO THE GL ACCOUNTS?

Hi everyone,
I´d would like to know if It´s possile GIVE AUTHORITY to some users will be able to modify the field SKB1 - ALTKT into the G/L Account Master Data through transacction FS02. In this way, only the selected users could introduce or modify information on this field.
I´m not sure if it can be done trough a new Z object and assign the object to the transacction and also in the user profiles..or in other way...
Thanks a lot for your help ¡

It is possible to restore his iPod to a backup on his computer (assuming he previously had synced it there and thus created a backup).

Using module pool pgm, Con't modify the table field valus

Hello frnds,
i m create one rpt using module pool pgm, click display button display the table values .
Iwant to modify some fields that changes is update to table.
Bellow coding is correct or not, how can modify the fields with save changes.
TABLES : ZRFIM1.
DATA: ZREPNO TYPE ZRFIM1-ZREPNO,
ZPLANT TYPE ZRFIM1-ZPLANT,
ZRIMNO TYPE ZRFIM1-ZRIMNO,
ZRIMDAT TYPE ZRFIM1-ZRIMDAT,
DISPLAY TYPE C,
CLEAR TYPE C,
EXIT TYPE C,
SAVE TYPE C,
OK_CODE LIKE SY-UCOMM.
data : itab type table of zrfim1 with default key.
data : wa_itab type zrfim1.
CALL SCREEN 100.
*& Module STATUS_0100 OUTPUT
text
SET PF-STATUS 'SAVE'.
AT USER-COMMAND.
module STATUS_0100 output.
SET PF-STATUS 'xxxxxxxx'.
SET TITLEBAR 'xxx'.
CASE SY-UCOMM.
WHEN 'EXIT'.
LEAVE PROGRAM.
WHEN 'BACK'.
LEAVE PROGRAM.
WHEN 'DISPLAY'.
SELECT SINGLE ZREPNO ZPLANT ZRIMNO ZRIMDAT FROM ZRFIM1
INTO (ZRFIM1-ZREPNO, ZRFIM1-ZPLANT, ZRFIM1-ZRIMNO, ZRFIM1-ZRIMDAT)
WHERE ZREPNO = ZRFIM1-ZREPNO.
WHEN 'CLEAR'.
CLEAR ZRFIM1.
WHEN 'SAVE'.
select single * from zrfim1 into wa_itab where ZREPNO = ZRFIM1-ZREPNO.
wa_itab-zrepno = ZREPNO.
wa_itab-zplant = ZPLANT.
wa_itab-zrimno = ZRIMNO.
wa_itab-zrimdat = ZRIMDAT.
modify zrfim1 from wa_itab.
ENDCASE.
endmodule.
Thanks in advance.

hello,
change the code like:
(IF ZRFIM1 is the structure has been used on screen)
wa_itab-zrepno = ZRFIM1-ZREPNO.
wa_itab-zplant = ZRFIM1-ZPLANT.
wa_itab-zrimno = ZRFIM1-ZRIMNO.
wa_itab-zrimdat = ZRFIM1-ZRIMDAT.
modify zrfim1 from wa_itab.
thanks
K.

EasySign: Can I or can't I modify filled fields?!

Is it just me, or is Acrobat EchoSign a user-hostile piece of garbage? I am using Reader 10.1.3. Below is a form I'd love to fill out and perhaps "sign" with a TIFF of my signature, but first I have to type in some fields. Getting to this point took me 20 minutes this morning:
(Sorry about the furry JPEG; Adobe Forums only passively informed me after I tried saving to three non-antialiasing "content types" that it would only accept the JPEG.)
If you will look at the name field under the "YOUR INFORMATION" section, you'll see three blue blotches reflecting three multiple-selections of zero-length text area boxes from the list at the right. Those objects are the result of my patiently left-clicking the I-beam over my name in an effort to modify the text I've entered in each field. Each time I did so, I would briefly see a blip appear under the I-beam, but it would not allow me to edit my text. The blip, of course, was a zero-length text area box being created. I persisted because at one moment I swear I did see an arrow icon and it let me make a blue selection over one patch of my text, but then for some reason when I typed nothing happened, and then the apparition vanished and I could not repeat it. And it was only after a few minutes, when in frustration I started playing with right-clicking over a text field, that I discovered the "Comments List" so useless to me.
There are now dozens of these mini-boxes all over the sheet (just look at how the "Comments List" has 86 entries instead of the 12 that actually contain text). But this means I can't edit something once I've finished a text, doesn't it? If so, why not? Why is it not clear to me, a sophisticated user? Why the bizarre and unpredictable behavior? Or am I some kind of idiot, not having found the correct incantation? Perhaps one of Adobe's priestly programmers or myriad sycophants will now enlighten us all, tacitly suggesting that it's merely my stupidity, for They Knew the Blessed Secret Their First Time.
I've searched pretty exhaustively for a solution to this and so far have found nothing, but perhaps that's because I've only budgeted 45 minutes for this would-be simple task. Am I going to have to pull this file into Illustrator, or print it out and mail it?
Twenty or so years ago, I was probably the first or second person outside of Mountain View to be shown the alpha of Carousel. Since that moment -- and despite having held out hope numerous times -- I still can't easily fill out a document online without heartache. Why can't I edit a field? What am I going to have to do when I want to modify a multi-line field? My workarounds over the years have run the gamut of every possible thing you can imagine, from scanning into Photoshop or Illustrator or Quark or InDesign; to blind fields and double-exposures on a laser printer; to glue; even to hacking the fields into the PostScript with setfonts and movetos and shows.
I've spent 40 years in the graphic arts; half of them I've wrestled with Acrobat, on some pretty complex work products having features of debatable benefit when shoehorned into PDF format. When it comes to the simple single-page monochrome Letter/A4 form -- the most abundant portable document on Earth -- we are now in Acrobat v10 and all I want to do is easily fill out a form and sign it and e-mail it back and I still can't.
Why is life so much harder now than when I could run this through a typewriter, Adobe? What are you really doing about it for the billions? How much more of our lives' valuable moments are you going to squander?
(P.S. What a difference almost a day makes: Hours after beginning this -- and just before submitting this article -- I myself have discovered the incantation with a few minutes' further experimentation over the many already expended. I can now recreate the arrow and edit the field. It is actually not difficult, but it is far from obvious and it is the furthest thing from good UI technique. Nevertheless, I now Know The Blessed Secret, or at least one part of it. But it does not change my position above. Can you surmise why, O Adobe Priesthood of Insufferable Sanctimony? If it takes a seasoned programmer hours to learn out the combination, what makes you think Grandma and Grandpa are ever going to figure it out?)

You do it unconsciously; we are all forced into these mentalities by our circumstances. But all three of you experts were wrong about who listens, at least when you pray as loudly as I do:
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Kevin M Lynch <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Peter,
This is Kevin M. Lynch and I run the Acrobat & Document Services business at Adobe (coincidentally our CTO is also named Kevin Lynch, but I’m not him - I run the document business).
I saw your forum post (http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1058887) and want to apologize for the difficulties you’re having filling out and signing a form.
It’s certainly our intention to make this a very easy process so I’m glad you went to the trouble to let us know that it was a frustrating experience for you.
Frustrating to me, but mainly because it is no doubt frustrating for (literally) billions of others less sophisticated than me. That is my main concern, and the ball I keep my eyes on. I feel terribly sorry for them.From what I can gather, you had no problem knowing where to go and click the “Sign” panel on the right and then clicking the add text button (and let me know if otherwise).
Well, that's a separate issue. I intuited that it was what I might need to fill out a basic form. But most people won't get even that.
But then there were two issues that prevented filling out and signing the form from being drop-dead easy:
1) After adding text the first time (which was hopefully easy – let me know if not), you couldn’t go back and correct it. Every time you tried, you ended up inserting a new blank text block. It would have been much nicer if we had a wider selection range so that if you clicked anywhere near a field that was already added we just selected it and allowed you to edit it.
I don't know about the width of the selection range; it seemed to me that there was *no* selection tolerance. I was rolling all over the text looking for it to catch and it wouldn't, hence 75 null textareas. (Possibly the cursor just was refusing to change from I-beam to arrow, I reasoned, and clicked, but did not get into an edit mode.) My sense is that it was not going to give me an arrow no matter where I went. My workaround (which few of your millions will be patient enough to discover) was forcibly exit the I-beam mode by going to the "Place Signature" mode and then re-enter the "Add Text" mode, which then readily showed me an arrow whenever I rolled near/over a textarea, and then let me click into the textarea and modify it.
I'm not on the subject machine. I'm on a brand-new laptop now and just upgraded its Reader from the factory 10.0.0 to 10.1.4 to get EchoSign and see if I can reproduce it here. On the same document, I appear now to be able to roll over created textareas and click the I-beam over them and get in. So it's not a global issue. The exhibiting machine is, I think, a Lenovo with Windows XP, but I will have to check this. If you need specific installation information to help isolate, please tell me what you need.
But I'm seeing some wrong behaviors even now:
While in "Add Text" mode (even when appearing to function properly, as on this installation), the elongated I-beam cursor does not morph to anything else as I roll over, so there is insufficient feedback prompting me to know I can modify the field.
This is inconsistent with what I experience when I escape "Add Text" mode. (I find I can escape "Add Text" either by entering "Insert Signature," as I note above, or in another way, by manually closing the editing palette by clicking its close box.) When I move out, I appear to be in a free-cursor mode; it now prompts me with a change to an arrowhead cursor whenever I roll over a textarea, and then it puts me into something unexpected called "Typewriter" mode (the only surface indication of the difference is that a lozenge in the editing palette now says "Typewriter" instead of "Add Text".
It is altogether unclear the functional difference between "Typewriter" mode and "Add Text" mode, or the purpose of having two different identities for two modes that seem to share some functions. Their behavior, however, is different enough to cause confusion. This could be streamlined quite a bit.
Editing text (new or modifying) in either of these two text modes appears to be operating one pixel below the finished text after repainting.
2) You couldn’t add a TIFF image as signature. I’ll have to have my team look into this as I can add one without any problems on my system. However, like you, I don’t understand why we don’t have both TIF & TIFF in the filter so I’ll have to follow up with my team to see if there is any reason for that.
This may also be local to that machine I was on Friday. When I return to Chicago I can check this, if it's important to you and if you are confident that doing so will bear fruit.
Am I correct in that those were the two issues or were there others? Once you went off the beaten path into comments you could see that we use the commenting capability, but our intent is to have it easy enough that you would never go there. If it helps to clean up your document, you can select each blank comment in the right side panel and hit the delete key to get rid of them.
See above, which gives you some more information. As you can glean from between all of my acerbic comments, I felt that the user experience was in many places carelessly thought through. You provide another case in point above, speaking of "Comments" mode. The three modes -- "Add Text," "Typewriter," and "Comments" -- obviously are genetically related. Their respective purposes become indistinct and confusing to the casual user. The basic shift from mode to mode is confusing; tool depth level and state are uncertain; use metaphor for each tool is nonstandard, inconsistent, and counterintuitive; visual feedback is lacking or inconsistent; and I think in some generals and some specifics each tool's entry point and interface needs to be reworked. I realize that you're constrained by the Reader API UI, so you don't have infinite flexibility, but there are still some basic things you can do.
Even with a working installation as I have here, it is confusing. On my View menu, I have two "Sign" and two "Tools" items. Why? I can't seem to find how to get back into "Typewriter" mode. What is it? Where is its entry point? Is it part of Sign or is it part of something else?
Form filling could use some user workshopping to figure out how to make it intuitive. Starting from the top, ideally, Acrobat Forms, if implemented in a document, should be user-seamless with EchoSign. Whether a document is forms-enabled or not, ideally the tools should have the same look and feel. I am skeptical about that being easy. But George Johnson raised the point that you now have two distinct products serving (from the user's perspective) identical purposes. If Reader is going to be user-centric, that proposition needs to be taken into account right away. Starting with that, a universal text editing palette for both Forms and EchoSign (whatever the underlying difference) might be in order. Distinguishing among text "in stone" (the immutable background PDF); malleable superimposed text fields and images (e.g., signature); and comments needs to be treated.
If I were god, just off the top of my head, tomorrow I would open all Acrobat documents by default in a basic "Add Text [e.g., fields and comments] or Image [e.g.,signature]" mode with a universal text-cum-graphics palette, similar to what you have but switchable within between text and image (consider PageMaker's old universal palette, dumbed down). If forms-enabled, the text palette would be activated and the cursor inside Field 1 ready to type. If not, you have an I-beam as the default. You could switch to Image mode within the palette and the palette would provide a signature subfunctionality (including EchoSign's capability of retaining as default signatureStamp), or other image type. Maybe outside that mode is panning and zooming, maybe panning and zooming are hierarchically equal to those two modes. I at least believe that the key to this is that text / comments // signatureStamp / images should now be as basic to Reader as pan/zoom. How to make those two modes intuitively switchable by the grandparents is probably not so tricky, but I would have to think about that a bit more.
I appreciate the time you’ve already taken to struggle through this and provide feedback. I personally want to eliminate the need to print out, sign, and fax back these stupid forms!
You and a few billion others. Thanks for the prompt response.
Regards,
Kevin

Modify the field TXJCD_ST of RFC_CALCULATE_TAXES_DOC

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for