In Dialogflow Fulfillment I simply want to pass data from the Welcome Intent to the help Intent using conv.user.storage as seen in the code below. I can add it in the welcome intent but when I try to retrieve it in the help intent it is always undefined meaning data is NOT passed to the help intent. I have spent several hours on something I thought was straight forward and played around without any success. I would really appreciate a real world example on how to fix it and understand what I'm doing wrong.
function welcome(agent) {
agent.add(request.body.queryResult.fulfillmentMessages[0].text.text[0]);
var entity = 'media_getreq?message=volume';
getData(entity).then(result => {
let conv = agent.conv();
conv.user.storage["devicedata"] = result;
console.log(conv.user.storage["devicedata"]); //WORKS
});
}
function help(agent) {
agent.add(request.body.queryResult.fulfillmentMessages[0].text.text[0]);
let conv = agent.conv();
console.log(conv.user.storage["devicedata"]); //ALWAYS EMPTY
}
You have missed out Contexts a critical componet required to link intents.
Contexts represent the current state of a user's
request and allow your agent to transport conversation information from one intent to another.
You can use combinations of input and output contexts to control the conversational path the user traverses through your dialog sequence.
In summary, The intent that collects your Welcome input uses an output context to "remember" what you said.
The same context is used as the input context to the next intent, which collects input into the HelpIntent.
You need to update your code accordingly. Please see for details:
https://dialogflow.com/docs/contexts
https://dialogflow.com/docs/contexts/contexts-api
I am trying to reset a form so that it appears to Drupal 8 that it hasn't been submitted. So far I have been unable to do this, as I cannot find any available methods (setSubmitted() hardcodes it to TRUE without a FALSE option). The reason is this isn't a full submit, but a submit of one field after which I would like the user to be redirected to another page that has another form, and I would like this secondary form to use the value obtained in the first step.
In the submit handler for the first part I use this to redirect:
$form_state->setRedirect('my.route', [], []);
And this works, but when the form reaches the second form (it seems) that the second form thinks it is a submission. As a result any submit buttons I add to the second form seem to make it auto-submit, and this breaks my user journey.
In the submit for the first part I have tried:
$form_state->setRebuild(TRUE);
$form_state = new FormState();
unset($form_state);
Tried the above in various configurations to no avail. They all prevent/ignore the setRedirect call that I make afterwards. The reason I want/need to do it this way is I want to preserve the POST method used.
Do you want to obtain something similar to what core search module does? It has simple SearchBlockForm that sends data to more complex SearchPageForm.
SearchBlockForm uses GET method (though you may use POST):
$form['#method'] = 'get';
and has no id and token fields:
function search_form_search_block_form_alter(&$form, FormStateInterface $form_state) {
$form['form_build_id']['#access'] = FALSE;
$form['form_token']['#access'] = FALSE;
$form['form_id']['#access'] = FALSE;
}
BTW, the last change allows you to avoid running submit callbacks.
Hope this helps.
TL;DR version:
In CQ workflows, is there a difference between what's available to the OR Split compared to the Process Step?
Is it possible to access the /history/ nodes of a workflow instance from within an OR Split?
How?!
The whole story:
I'm working on a workflow in CQ5 / AEM5.6.
In this workflow I have a custom dialog, which stores a couple of properties on the workflow instance.
The path to the property I'm having trouble with is: /workflow/instances/[this instance]/history/[workItem id]/workItem/metaData and I've called the property "reject-or-approve".
The dialog sets the property fine (via a dropdown that lets you set it to "reject" or "approve"), and I can access other properties on this node via a process step (in ecma script) using:
var actionReason;
var history = workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow());
// loop backwards through workItems
// and as soon as we find a Action Reason that is not empty
// store that as 'actionReason' and break.
for (var index = history.size() - 1; index >= 0; index--) {
var previous = history.get(index);
var tempActionReason = previous.getWorkItem().getMetaDataMap().get('action-message');
if ((tempActionReason != '')&&(tempActionReason != null)) {
actionReason = tempActionReason;
break;
}
}
The process step is not the problem though. Where I'm having trouble is when I try to do the same thing from inside an OR Split.
When I try the same workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow()) in an OR Split, it throws an error saying workItem is not defined.
I've tried storing this property on the payload instead (i.e. storing it under the page's jcr:content), and in that case the property does seem to be available to the OR Split, but my problems with that are:
This reject-or-approve property is only relevant to the current workflow instance, so storing it on the page's jcr:content doesn't really make sense. jcr:content properties will persist after the workflow is closed, and will be accessible to future workflow instances. I could work around this (i.e. don't let workflows do anything based on the property unless I'm sure this instance has written to the property already), but this doesn't feel right and is probably error-prone.
For some reason, when running through the custom dialog in my workflow, only the Admin user group seems to be able to write to the jcr:content property. When I use the dialog as any other user group (which I need to do for this workflow design), the dialog looks as though it's working, but never actually writes to the jcr:content property.
So for a couple of different reasons I'd rather keep this property local to the workflow instance instead of storing it on the page's jcr:content -- however, if anyone can think of a reason why my dialog isn't setting the property on the jcr:content when I use any group other than admin, that would give me a workaround even if it's not exactly the solution I'm looking for.
Thanks in advance if anyone can help! I know this is kind of obscure, but I've been stuck on it for ages.
a couple of days ago i ran into the same issue. The issue here is that you don't have the workItem object, because you don't really have an existing workItem. Imagine the following: you are going through the workflow, you got a couple of workItems, with means, either process step, either inbox item. When you are in an or split, you don't have existing workItems, you can ensure by visiting the /workItems node of the workflow instance. Your workaround seems to be the only way to go through this "issue".
I've solved it. It's not all that elegant looking, but it seems to be a pretty solid solution.
Here's some background:
Dialogs seem to reliably let you store properties either on:
the payload's jcr:content node (which wasn't practical for me, because the payload is locked during the workflow, and doesn't let non-admins write to its jcr:content)
the workItem/metaData for the current workflow step
However, Split steps don't have access to workItem. I found a fairly un-helpful confirmation of that here: http://blogs.adobe.com/dmcmahon/2013/03/26/cq5-failure-running-script-etcworkflowscriptscaworkitem-ecma-referenceerror-workitem-is-not-defined/
So basically the issue was, the Dialog step could store the property, but the OR Split couldn't access it.
My workaround was to add a Process step straight after the Dialog in my workflow. Process steps do have access to workItem, so they can read the property set by the Dialog. I never particularly wanted to store this data on the payload's jcr:content, so I looked for another location. It turns out the workflow metaData (at the top level of the workflow instance node, rather than workItem/metaData, which is inside the /history sub-node) is accessible to both the Process step and the OR Split. So, my Process step now reads the workItem's approveReject property (set by the Dialog), and then writes it to the workflow's metaData node. Then, the OR Split reads the property from its new location, and does its magic.
The way you access the workflow metaData from the Process step and the OR Split is not consistent, but you can get there from both.
Here's some code: (complete with comments. You're welcome)
In the dialog where you choose to approve or reject, the name of the field is set to rejectApprove. There's no ./ or anything before it. This tells it to store the property on the workItem/metaData node for the current workflow step under /history/.
Straight after the dialog, a Process step runs this:
var rejectApprove;
var history = workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow());
// loop backwards through workItems
// and as soon as we find a rejectApprove that is not empty
// store that as 'rejectApprove' and break.
for (var index = history.size() - 1; index >= 0; index--) {
var previous = history.get(index);
var tempRejectApprove = previous.getWorkItem().getMetaDataMap().get('rejectApprove');
if ((tempRejectApprove != '')&&(tempRejectApprove != null)) {
rejectApprove = tempRejectApprove;
break;
}
}
// steps up from the workflow step into the workflow metaData,
// and stores the rejectApprove property there
// (where it can be accessed by an OR Split)
workItem.getWorkflowData().getMetaData().put('rejectApprove', rejectApprove);
Then after the Process step, the OR Split has the following in its tabs:
function check() {
var match = 'approve';
if (workflowData.getMetaData().get('rejectApprove') == match) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
Note: use this for the tab for the "approve" path, then copy it and replace var match = 'approve' with var match = 'reject'
So the key here is that from a Process step:
workItem.getWorkflowData().getMetaData().put('rejectApprove', rejectApprove);
writes to the same property that:
workflowData.getMetaData().get('rejectApprove') reads from when you execute it in an OR Split.
To suit our business requirements, there's more to the workflow I've implemented than just this, but the method above seems to be a pretty reliable way to get values that are entered in a dialog, and access them from within an OR Split.
It seems pretty silly that the OR Split can't access the workItem directly, and I'd be interested to know if there's a less roundabout way of doing this, but for now this has solved my problem.
I really hope someone else has this same problem, and finds this useful, because it took me waaay to long to figure out, to only apply it once!
I implemented a feature to automatically load the next record after finishing the current one. On the server, I can get the next record and load it into the model fine. The problem is, when I return the view, MVC favors the posted values from the previous record over the model values from the current record.
Public Function Update(model As UpdateModel) As ActionResult
'... save changes to the model
If model.LoadNext Then
Dim nextRecord As UpdateModel = GetNextRecord()
Return View(nextRecord)
Else
Return RedirectToAction("Index")
End If
End Function
I've confirmed in the debugger that I am passing the nextRecord properly. The view is reading the posted values (from the Request I guess?) instead of using the model.
Is there a way to avoid this behavior. Request.Form, Request.Params, and Request.QueryString are all read only so I cannot clear them.
You should call ModelState.Clear() before returning the view. Keep in mind Post-Redirect-Get is also an option if you don't want to break user navigation.
This is an edited version of a question that I had previously asked (and that tbroyer answered) about why the isDirty() method didn't return true after attempting to modify the Editor version of an entity. I think that my understanding of the RequestFactory/EditorDriver handling of entities is the issue, and that the isDirty() question was a red herring. I've left my original question at the end of this question, but my new question is:
How can the entity (proxy) that is being edited by an EditorDriver be modified in code? Obviously values will be changed as a result of changes in the user interface; but I don't know how to change values 'behind the scenes'. My understanding is that the call to EditorDriver.edit() will create a copy of the proxy object, and that subsequently any changes to that copy will be applied to the original object using EditorDriver.flush(). But EditorDriver.edit() does not return a reference to the object that is being edited (unlike RequestContext.edit(), which does return a reference to the object being edited).
The original (ill-informed) question:
I don't understand why the EditorDriver.isDirty() method is not returning true in the following situation (the following onOrgSelectedEvent() method is invoked when a new Org has been selected from a listbox):
private IOrgProxy _org;
...
/**
* Loads the currently selected Org into the editor.
*/
#Override
public void onOrgSelectedEvent(final OrgSelectedEvent orgSelectedEvent) {
IOrgProxy org = _clientFactory.getCache().getOrgCache().getOrg(orgSelectedEvent.getOrgId());
_orgRequestContext = _clientFactory.getRequestFactory().newOrgRequestContext();
_org = _orgRequestContext.edit(org);
_orgEditorDriver.edit(_org, _orgRequestContext);
_org.setName(_org.getName() + " (edit)");
if (_orgEditorDriver.isDirty()) {
_org.setName(org.getName());
}
}
When I put breakpoints on the setName() calls I see that the first call changes the name in the editable Org object, but the second setName() call is never reached (i.e., _orgEditorDriver.isDirty() returns false).
Just as a side question, it seems strange to me that the EditorDriver.edit() method doesn't return the editable proxy object, and that I have to call RequestContext.edit(), but that's a very minor issue.
Why would isDirty be true just after edit? Clearly the user hasn't be given the time to do any change.
isDirty compares the current value of the subeditors to their original value, it doesn't care whether the object changed: if you lend the object to the editor, you implicitly gives it control over the edited object (for the edited properties).