Hello,

In MDG-M 6.1, I am trying to enable the printing of a change request and tried the following configuration but without success.

In MDGIMG "Assign Print Forms for Single Processing", for the MM data model, I first tried:

UI Configuration:  Z01_BS_MAT_OVP_03 (this is my deep copy which is working in production but with no printing enabled)

Entity Type:  MATERIAL

Form:  USMD_EDITION_CREQUEST (this is the form referenced in SAP's 6.1 configuration help guide)

When I try using form USMD_EDITION_CREQUEST as shown above, I get the following short dump:

"CALL_FUNCTION_CONFLICT_TYPE" "CX_SY_DYN_CALL_ILLEGAL_TYPE"

"CL_MDG_BS_MAT_PDF=============CP" or "CL_MDG_BS_MAT_PDF=============CM001"

"PRINT"

I also see that there is another form available named MDG_BS_MAT_PDF_03.  But when I try that form, the following error is displayed:  "Cannot print the material (DATA TRANSFER TO PRINT FORM)"

I am hoping someone can tell me what I have missing to successfully use the "out of the box" print form.

Rob

Dear Experts,

I'm trying to find a solution for replicating a Custom MDG entity delta records only.

Using DRFOUT, when I use my filter, I'm able to replicate all active records using my Replication model (type RFC).

My question is, can I use the Replication mode: Changes (the one that identifies the changed records based on Change Pointers) and replicate only the newlly activated records?

Also any other ideas on how to replicate the delta are welcome.

Thanks in advance,

Boris

Hello,

I am setting up the basic MDG for Material scenario and currently have a few questions about the workflow configuration.  In transaction SWDD I can view the configuration for workflow WS60800086.  There seem to be a number of steps related to determining the correct agents to assign to the new change request.  The step "Dialogue Processing" is set to a rule 60800140.  When I examine the rule, it is assigned to this function module: USMD5_SSW_CR_USER_AGT_DET.  I took a look briefly through the code and it looks like it's doing something at the org level, like reading in the org structure of the user who created the change request.  But I can't seem to figure out what exactly the rule is doing.

Can someone provide some input on this?

Hi Experts,

I am new to Master Data Governance. We are currently using MDG 6.0 and have tried activating the MDG for Suppliers. Unfortunately, we have implemented time dependent master data (customers) a few years before. Is it possible to build MDG for vendors without using BP data model? Can this be done through custom objects? Can you provide the steps?

Best rgds,

Rom

Hi Gurus,

This question is with respect to List Window UIBB, component FPM_LIST_UIBB_ATS using feeder class CL_USMD_ENTITY_VALUE2_PROXY. Please see the screen shots below. I configured few attribute elements display type as input field, but at run time it does not allow me to edit the elements. I am able to edit the Form Window attributes but not the List Window attributes. Can somebody help me on this?

Attribute Settings/Properties:

Runtime Results:

Thanks.

Ramesh

Hello Expert,

I have create a some rule on standard material change request on some fields in Material MDG trough BRF+ . Like

If Material Type is Equal to 'FERT'

Then Material Group is '01'

Else Log   Action Message 'Select Material Group as 01 '. Shows as Error Message .

When I simulate the Rule in BRF+ is working Fine .

After everythings  get activated in BRF+ .

when I am trying to create CR and giving some value there like  Material Type  is Equal 'FERT '& Material Group 'XY'(except 01) . It is not showing any error message, which I define in Rule .

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Nikhilesh

I have a question regarding using MDG for request/approval process of a custom data object but not auto-creation or replication. To give more context The scenario is user wants to submit request for a new legal entity along with the business reasoning (a form with few attributes can be used here (no ECC validations required),  the request shoud be routed to approver and once it is approved, instead of creating any data in ECC, a email or any form of notification is generated for configuration team to configure the new company code.

The reason we are trying to do this in MDG, is to keep the governance in place for data objects that may not be supported by MDG.

Any response in this regard is highly appreciated.

Thanks

Hi Gurus

We are implementing MDG-C 6.1 in co-deploy mode.

The system is full standard but I cannot make appear UI config BS_OVP_BP_ALL to create/process BPs.

I have made the package BS_OVP_BP_ALL visibl; I have hidden BS_OVP_BP.

Users are assigned to data model BP in SU01 personalization.

I applied BC sets to get the following CR types :

CUST1P1

CUST2P1

CUST5P1

CUST6P1

WF steps are assigned to processors for all those CR types.

I did everything according to the config guide but it keeps raising the error message : "No change request types available for business activity"

It seems it wants business activity CLP1 but I want to use Business activity CUP1.

Are there additional config steps? Do I need to specify BS_OVP_BP_ALL somewhere?

Many thanks in advance

Hi,

I have a question, Malaysia has recently implemented the Goods & services tax, which is equivalent to the VAT tax in most countries such as UK etc.

In light of this changes, some enterprise  are affected by it and they need to configure their SAP ERP systems to be VAT-complaint. I need to determine what are the master data that will be affected and then make the relevant changes.

In such a case, may I know which master data are likely to be impacted by it?

The client is in the electric utilities and power sector.

Many thanks,

Mahvin

Dear all:

We need to upload ~14.000 BP (customer) addresses from a CSV file. Our system is on MDG-C 6.1 SP02. The data in the CSV file is quite simple. We only need to create a few address fields.

According to the research I did the only way to upload this data from a CSV file is to use MDG File Download/Upload. MDG File Download/Upload only allows the data upload by Entity Type. So, my conclusion is that our objective to create only a few address fields can become quite a complex task if we need to create a full BP/customer record by uploading entity by entity (table by table). This requires as well that one knows the right entity/table upload sequence.

1. We managed to upload BP_HEADER und BP_CENTRAL entities (BUT000). Currently we are stuck trying to upload the address data. Relevant entity types for the address data upload seem to be BP_ADDR (BUT020), ADDRNO (BUT020?) and AD_POSTAL/AD_NAME_O (ADRC). BP_ADDR, ADDRNO and AD_POSTAL are all giving the error message "Field Addr. no. of transfer structure is unknown" when we are trying to select and add field "Address Number" to the file download/upload structure. For the initial address creation our plan was to leave field "Address Number" (ADDRNO) blank in the upload file and only have values in field Business Partner Number (BP_HEADER) since Address Number range interval is internal according to our system customizing. However, as I said we are not even able to add field Address number to the download/upload structure because of the above mentioned error message. Did anyone already experience similar problems ? Or how did you manage to initially upload Address Numbers ?

2. Can anyone tell if corresponding customer tables are automatically populated by MDG CVI e.g. once we will upload the BP roles (BP_ROLE) or do we need to upload all relevant customer tables as well using corresponding entity types (e.g. BP_CUSGEN) ?

Thanks.

Regards,

Selho

Hi Experts,

      1.   I am trying to set a default initial value in some required fields in NWBC using BRF+.

            Can anyone please  help me to know the exact step to achieve that.I have wriiten some derivation rules but it is not reflecting in the nwbc ui screen.

      2 .  I have tried to set some business rules for field level validation from BRF+,and I have written some rules in BRF+ and when I test those rules from BRF+ start simulation, the rules were executed  properly but those field level validation was not reflecting in the NWBC screens when I am tring to create a new CR.

    Please suggest me on how to reflect those rules,field level validations in NWBC.

Regards,

    Anupam

Hello All,

Can we hide the buttons like Edit, Change documents and workflow log, after the activation of a material in MDG-M.

OR if possible disable the buttons after the Change request has 05/07[final check approved/activation failed] status.

Thank You,

Shaila.

Hello Experts,

I am having a customized INIT and OVP page for MDG- material accessing from Portal.

What happens is in the application 'My Change Requests' which calls 'USMD_EDITION_CREQUEST' navigates to the INIT page according to the standard link logical actions.

standard:

custom:

The above link logical action entry is for making the custom INIT screen to be populated upon load of  'create material' from Portal.

But , when i click on create material, give some entries and save a CR and try to open the 'my change requests' it opens the INIT page without any filled up fields with respect to the CR type.

The problem is i need the init page to be filled up based on the saved CR type.

If i dont use the init page and give OVP in the  'USMD_EDITION_CREQUEST' navigation of link logical actions, the original custom init screen changes will not apply.

and if i use the INIT page, 'my change request' in portal will display my init page with no values filled from the saved CR.

How can i solve the 'my change request' to populate the fields form saved CR material.

Hope i was clear.

Any hints/suggestions will be highly appreciated.

Thank you,

Shaila.

Hi Experts,

I am facing a major issue in SAP MDG S.I have added five customized fields in the MDG S UI under BP_CENTRL.

I have followed all the procedures correctly and successfully extended the data model and LFA1 .The funcionality is working fine in Create Change Request scenario wherein after entering the values in the customized fields ,the CR is activated and BIT000 and LFA1 tables are updated with the customized field record.

But in the Process Change Request scenario for an Existing Vendor ,whenever I am trying to insert/modify a new value in the customized fields and hit the check button,the data is getting wiped out/cleared  from the UI as a result of which the new value is not getting saved.

Problem in the process scenario:

Data  in the Customized  fields not getting inserted/modified for Active Vendors.

While trying to add/modify any data in the customized Section
and pressing Check button, the the new change is not getting affected, that is it is
getting back to the previous state.

Please help as it is very urgent .I just cant find any clue on this.Please help.

Thanks

Avik

Hi to all,

I defined 2 attributes of PCTR entity as "authorization Relevant attributes",

during the Creation of the Change Request the Authority-check for the object USMD_MDAT is ok;

The strange behaviour happens when I call standard wda reports such as usmd_change_document (Mass Change) : if the entity isn't active the relevant attributes aren't correctly filled and the authority-check is performed with blank KEY FIELDS.

I found the check is in cl_usmd_mdf_dbaccess_services=>filter_data

LOOP AT ct_data INTO <ls_data>.
 *       Ignore all inactive data.           CHECK <ld_active> = usmd1_cs_active-active.

in this way the authority performed in CL_USMD_AUTHORITY->CHECK_AUTH_DATA isn't correct..the key fields of the entity are filled correctly but the attributes are filled with spaces

any ideas?

Thank you!

hello,

MDF Finance Workflow WS75700040 is succesfully implemented and approver roles are assinged. it is working as expected for approval process. but the problem is the data is not seen in ECC. it should be seen after the activation step in the workflow which runs as background step after the approval. the same is seen in customer and supplier workflows

a new GL Account is created in MDG Finance, workflow starts, approver approves the request, but this GL Account is not seen in FSP0.

TS75707953 Activate change request step is executed succesfully post the approval and workflow is completed

stil the changes are not seen in ECC

i.e. the newly created GL Account is not seen in FSP0

the help.sap link clearly states as follows http://help.sap.com/erp2005_ehp_05/helpdata/EN/84/d454d14dbf4a8bb5fce8e696accade/content.htm
The changes are then activated in the central system. When the workflow has been completed, the changes still need to be distributed to the local systems.

So there should not be any separate step for the changes to  be seen in the ECC system itself

and if it is there, it should be part of workflow itself.

please help with any inputs or comments.

thanks

bhakti

Hello All,

Our company is looking at MDG is an option for Master Data Governance.

Is there any reference list for the customers using MDG?

Thanks,

Hakan

Dear MDG Experts,

I'm trying to find out what controlls the Approver screen in MDG and disables the editing of all fields.

In my scenario I need the Approver to do some field changes (like the Master Data Specialist) and then press the Approve button.

Please advise if you know how to make the Approver screen fields editable (not read-only).

Thanks in advance,

Boris

Hello,

we would like to configure the MDG-S 6.1 Vendor UI so that external number assignment in the Vendor UI is possible. This means user is selecting an external "Account Group" in "ERP Vendor Details/Administrative Data" and is manually entering a vendor number in the "Vendor" field.

However, this does not seem to be possible with MDG-S 6.1 Vendor UI.

We tried the following configurations:

1. BP Internal Number Assignment + Vendor External Number Assignment + Same Number

-> This combination is working, however "Vendor" field to enter the number remains greyed out so that it is not possible to enter a number manually

2. BP Internal Number Assignment + Vendor External Number Assignment + Not same number

-> With this combination we are getting the error "Vendor number was not filled during external number assignment" but "Vendor" field to enter the number remains greyed out so that it is not possible to enter a number manually

3. BP External Number Assignment + Vendor External Number Assignment + Same Number

-> With this combination there is an error message "BP number is not the same as vendor number" and "Vendor" field becomes editable. However, when we enter a number manually in the field and press "Check" or "Save" the UI is dumping with the dump which can be seen below.

4. BP External Number Assignment + Vendor External Number Assignment + Not same Number

-> With this combination there is an error message "external vendor number has to be entered" and "Vendor" field becomes editable. However, when we enter a number manually in the field and press "Check" or "Save" the UI is dumping with the dump which can be seen below.

The Lean Vendor UI is showing same behaviour. On top the "Administrative Data" UIBB which is holding the "Vendor" and "Account Group" fields are hidden. When you make them visible you have the same mentioned behaviour plus some more error messages from which it seems that data entered in the Lean Vendor UI is not passed to the BP in the background since "Administrative Data" enabling is "confusing" standard behaviour of the Lean Vendor UI which is deriving BP role and account group in the background, the latter based on BP grouping and assigned account group.

Here is some additional information:
Regarding all 4 mentioned configuration options we kept the following standard configuration unchanged: "Define Prefixes for internal key assignment". In this configuration as well as in the data model "ADDRNO" and "BP_HEADER" are still set to "temporary"/"Key can be changed; internal key assignment possible (BP_HEADER)" and "Internal Key assignment only (ADDRNO)"
BP ADDRNO $
BP BP_HEADER $

We are assuming this does not affect any of the 4 configuration options above nor does it has to be adjusted for any of them ?

Most importantly, as explained we need to be able to enter an external vendor ID in the Vendor UI. The vendor ID not necessarily has to be the same as the BP ID but it could be the same. Unfortunately, we do not seem to be able to achieve this with the 4 mentioned configuration options.  

-> Can anyone confirm those restrictions ?

Regards,

Michael

--------------------------------------------

The following error occurred in system : The ASSERT condition was violated.  

The error occurred on application server and in work process.

The termination type was: RABAX_STATE

The ABAP call stack was:
Method: DETERMINE_STAGING_PP_SOURCE_P of program CL_USMD_MODEL=================CP
Method: READ_CHAR_VALUE_P of program CL_USMD_MODEL=================CP
Method: IF_USMD_MODEL_EXT~READ_CHAR_VALUE of program CL_USMD_MODEL_EXT=============CP
Method: READ_BP_SALES_DATA of program CL_MDG_BS_ECC_HANDLER=========CP
Method: UPDATE_PARTNER_FUNCTIONS of program CL_MDG_BS_CUST_HANDLER========CP
Method: IF_MDG_BS_BP_ACCESS_HANDLER~DERIVE_DATA_ON_KEY_CHANGE of program CL_MDG_BS_CUST_HANDLER========CP
Method: IF_USMD_PP_ACCESS~DERIVE_DATA_ON_KEY_CHANGE of program CL_MDG_BS_FND_ACCESS==========CP
Method: IF_USMD_PP_ACCESS~DERIVE_DATA_ON_KEY_CHANGE of program CL_MDG_BS_BP_ACCESS_MASTER====CP
Method: DERIVE_ON_KEY_CHANGE of program CL_USMD_PP_ACCESS_ADAPTER=====CP
Method: KEY_CHANGED of program CL_USMD_MDF_KEY_HANDLER=======CP

Hi Experts,

We are using vendor like UI and when I use the block scenario the fields are greyed out to select or deselect the Central Posting Block. All other fields are available. See attachment. Any suggestions?

Thanks and best regards

Riaan