[brettg]

I have created a workflow to clone an existing item record into a new item record via a custom button however adding a suffix to the item name/number to allow for the new item to be unique. This is being accomplished through an Item workflow with a Create Record action. Within the parameters of the Create Record action I have listed Name and entered the formula

CONCAT({itemid},’-XXX’). The new item is being created however with the name/number of Invalid Expression – XXX due to {itemid}.

Why would {itemid}, which is representative of the Name of the item record, result in an Invalid Expression? To test this, I replaced {itemid} with {displayname} which worked.

Can anyone speak to the issues of referencing {itemid} when attempting to run a CONCAT formula within the workflow action?
This is a cached copy. Click here to see the original post.

[dmatyas]

Hi,

we tested it on our environment and it worked like a charm. Can you provide more details? E.g. describe precisely your scenario.

Thanks,

Daniel

[brettg]

Thanks for the reply Daniel.

I have created a workflow with the Record Type = Item, Sub-Types = All (I have selected all values). The Event Definition is On Create and On Update, in Testing status, Trigger Type = All, w/ logging enabled.

State 1 of my workflow displays a button on the item record. When clicked, the workflow transitions to State 2 and creates a new item record via the single Create Record Action. Within this action and in the Parameters section, I am sourcing specific values from the originating item onto the newly created item record. The ‘Name’ field in the parameters contains the formula

CONCAT({itemid},’-XXX’.

When workflow completes, the item is created however the item name displays as follows: Invalid Expression – XXX. The invalid expression is directly referring to {itemid}. No other values within this parameter for Name are populated.

Any thoughts why {itemid} within this context would throw an Invalid Expression error rather than the text (sku) entered?

[brettg]

Daniel – I opened case # 2035721, hoping that I can get this resolved.

[Author]

Posts