Recently active topics

A check in development mode versions of the Universal GUI and universal Backend to compare both versions or showing all version information on the information screen in Universal GUI.

Good improvement that tickets which require user action are only counted for the badge now and are default sorted on top.   Please add the ‘Product’ field (Universal/SF/IAM/etc.) back to the grid, this helps with finding an issue when you don’t remember the title.   After executing the ‘Annulering beoordelen’ task, an issue stays visible with status ‘Opgelost’ while the prefilter ‘Gesloten tickets verbergen’ is active. For example ticket 14568i.   ‘Activiteit’ and ‘Commentaar’ are a bit confusing/redundant: In ‘Activiteit’ I see the whole conversation, but the Add button doesn’t work (all fields are read-only/hidden). My expectation was that I could add a ‘Commentaar’ line here. In ‘Commentaar’ I only see a small part of the conversation. For example messages that are written when the issues switches status between 'In behandeling' and 'Reactie gewenst' are missing.   The default screentype could be improved if it shows the form below/next to the grid. So you could see the ‘Toelicht

I think it would be nice if you could change whether a task is placed in the overflow or a primary action based on data of the row.There are a lot of tables with a large number of tasks. Being able to hide tasks in the context is good, but sometimes I don’t want to fully disable a task, just guide the user with tasks they are most likely to use and tasks that are seldomly used in certain states.

The change screen type lookup on subject when in a application, only shows the name of the screen type: Problem is you don’t get any information on what you are selecting. And you can select a screen type that does not allow you to change screen types. Thus you have to go to IAM remove the screen type and try another. If the lookup provided more info you actually make a calculated decision instead of a best guess when changing screen types. Something like this:  

During development I regularly use the Windows GUI to find relevant information regarding screens, columns, parameters, etc. with the Alt + F1 combination (Path Location). Even though the Universal GUI has “Model Insight”, it is lacking many things the other option is giving.I think it is not the intent of ThinkWise to keep the need for using a different GUI to make your Universal GUI product complete. This idea is to make the “Model Insight” improve its usability and hopefully remove the need for a fall back GUI.Current issues or features missing that I am aware of:References more than 1 level deep, do still show the level 1 reference; References more than 1 level deep, do not show table / variant information; Unable to get info when a grid has no records to click on; No context information (Detail, Master, etc.); No Tab Control (What Detail group is being used); No Domain information; No Task name is mentioned, only the parameter as “Column”; No Report name is mentioned, only the par

We have deployed an application for use on a ZEBRA scanner device.The application functions smoothly and intuitively, with one exception.It is designed around barcode scanning, and in over 95% of cases, the process can be completed simply by scanning barcodes. To support this workflow, the SuppressBarcodeKeyboard setting is enabled (Yes), which hides the on-screen keyboard.However, this has a side effect: users are unable to manually enter codes using the keyboard. This becomes problematic when barcodes are either inaccessible to the scanner or damaged.To address this, we would like to add an action button within the barcode control that allows users to activate the keyboard when needed.Something like this:We hope this is possible.Alternatively, is there another workaround you would recommend?  

In a current customer project, the customer indicated an issue with how numeric and integer fields handle input length restrictions.At the moment, when a numeric or integer field is configured with a maximum of, for example, 6 digits, users are still able to enter more than 6 digits. This results in a validation error message such as: “Artikel nr heeft teveel cijfers”However, the customer expects the behavior to be consistent with varchar fields. For varchar fields (for example varchar(6)) users are prevented from entering more than 6 characters in the first place.Requested improvement:Align the behavior of numeric and integer fields with varchar fields, users are prevented from entering more digits than the configured maximum length, instead of receiving an error message afterward.

When you make an existing column in a table mandatory (and no default value is set), you get a very helpful validation warning you to setup the data migration for this column.When you create a unique index on an existing column (or set of columns), no validation will be shown.It would be nice to have a warning in the validations list to show the developer that this could lead to issues.

Often there are situations where you want to show a different tab-variant as a detail tab based on a specific property of the selected row in the main grid. This is possible by making multiple references and let the context procedure only show the detail tab with the tab-variant based on the property value.When there are multiple detail tabs for the main subject, this has one major downside though: Normally the GUI remembers the activated detail tab when the user switches rows in the main grid. However when the context procedure switches the reference for a different tab-variant, it activates the first visible detail tab.This creates inconsequent behaviour for the user when switching rows in the main grid because sometimes it does keep the same detail tab activated and sometimes it doesn’t. From the user perspective, the different references to the same detail tab are the same thing.To improve the behaviour of cases when the activated detail tab becomes hidden by a context procedure, t

When a domain with datatype BIT and control checkbox is not mandatory, there are 3 options:empty (null) selected/active (0) deselected/inactive (1)When it is mandatory there are 2 options (0 & 1) but an asterisk is shown behind the options. For the user this looks like you have to select the active option. F.e. when you have to agree to an user policy it is obligated to check the checkbox. → We would like to have a mandatory checkbox without the asterisk so the user does not feel obligated to check the checkbox.

Idea to add conditional layout on a card list. Below I have a card list and a normal list with conditional layout. But the conditional layout is not visible on the card list.It would be great if this is possible! 😁 

Would it be possible to have an extra Height Unit available called something like “Form Units” which is equal to the raster height in forms?   This is the unwanted result when a fixed height in pixels is set, is shows extra whitespace then the height is to much or a vertical scrollbar when the height is set to low and it also depends on the client screen screen size and resolution. Especially on small handheld devices this is annoying.Ideally it should look like this  

The backlog of the Universal GUI is really missing drag and drop from a cardlist. In a web-environment a card-list is quite often used (at least we do) and it is really a pity that apparently the drag-drop functionality will not be implemented for this component. I would really like to see drag-drop also from cardlist aside the grid and tree.    

Hi,It would be greate to bring the arrange functionality back to the process flow designer screen!Currently, I'm really struggling to get a clear format, that's partly due to how the lines originate from the output side, especially when using a loop or multiple lines. As a result, it starts making strange turns on its own in the design screen.Maybe you are already working on that, in which case I haven't said anything haha.

SummaryAllow Thinkwise customers to share AI-enrichments they've created in their own Software Factory to a central, curated repository managed by Thinkwise — so that the entire customer community can discover, import, and benefit from enrichments written by others.The Problem TodayEach Thinkwise development-team develops AI-enrichments independently in their own Software Factory. There is no mechanism to share these enrichments with the broader Thinkwise community, which means:Customers reinvent the wheel building similar or identical enrichments. Valuable knowledge and innovation stays locked inside individual tenants. Smaller teams with fewer resources benefit less from AI capabilities compared to larger customers who invest more in development.The Proposed SolutionIntroduce a Shared AI-Enrichment Hub within the Software Factory, with the following flow:Create locally — A customer builds an AI-enrichment in their own Software Factory as they do today. Opt-in to share — The customer