Foundation

hi team, testing the emailid's,1234567-45 testing 1234567-9ow2 doing 12 34 567- 2 2 test 12/34,567:- 2.2 tests 12345an67-92 dummy 12345-23  have to extract the id's and after extracting need to format in below format, 12345-05, 123456-06 1234567-07 could you please suggest best approch.

Hi team! I’m running into an issue with how navigation names appear in the browser tab—the tab is currently displaying the process name. Has anyone dealt with this before? I came across some older posts (3–4 years ago) describing the same issue, but I’m wondering if there have been any updates or new approaches since then. Any pointers or examples would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Hello I have a requirement to read text from PDF so we have used getpdftext but if the user uploads password protected PDF file , the function getpdftext is throwing the below error- Expression evaluation error at function 'getpdftext': Cannot decrypt PDF, the password is incorrect If the file is password protected, I need to by pass the flow which is going to getpdftext, So Before only I need to check if the file is password protected or NOT. Can any one please suggest how to achieve this.

Hello Everyone, I am currently working with the new gridPlusLayoutField component and noticed that the drag & drop functionality (which was working in the older gridPlusLayout) is not available anymore. In the older version, we were able to use drag interactions, but in the new GridPlus, it seems to be disabled or not supported. I wanted to check: Is there any configuration or property to enable drag & drop in gridPlusLayoutField? Or has this functionality been removed/changed in the new version? I have already checked basic configurations like readOnly and edit-related settings, but didn’t find anything specific for drag & drop. Any clarification or workaround would be really helpful. Thanks in advance!

Hi all,   I have a question about process variables behavior in parallel flows and exception handling.   Scenario: - The parent process has a process variable (pv!x) initialized with value = 5. - The process splits into two parallel branches. - Both branches start with pv!x = 5.   Then: - Branch A continues execution, updates pv!x, and reaches the merge point. - The parent process continues and later updates pv!x = 6. - Meanwhile, Branch B is still active and waiting in a task (for example, a user input or a task with an exception flow handling an error).   Question: Will Branch B see the updated value (pv!x = 6) while it is still in that task/exception state, or will it continue working with the original value (pv!x = 5) that was evaluated when the branch started?   In other words: Are process variables dynamically re-evaluated for already running parallel activities, or do they keep the value from the moment the activity started?   Thanks in advance!

Preface: I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the new Test Scenarios feature within the 26.1+ interface designer - it takes my longstanding wishlist item and implements it more richly still. Nevertheless I find myself, while using it, having the following pain points / nitpicks, which I hope relevant parties might see here. (I also posted them in my a!ppIdeas feature request, FWIW.) Issues / wishlist: Ability to tell which scenario we're currently ON We are given no clue what scenario (if any) we're currently viewing, whether you look at  The interface designer, the test scenario picker drop-down (which should be a bare minimum) Somewhere, we should be able to see which one we're on and/or which one was most recently selected Ability to reorder the scenarios within the "Manage Scenarios" pop-up if one is selected, give us a "move up / move down" button or something If a scenario is loaded and we click "TEST", the default values seen in t

Hello, my team and I are creating an application regarding pensions data.  I wanted to come here and ask: what is the best way to handle date formats if I want it to be customizable. I want to store somewhere these formats (for example: shortDate, longDate, technicalDate).  We set it up as a decision, where the different formats are stored and passed to an expression rule, like the image. for now it works, of course, but we would like to make understadable even to other developer who are not necessarily used to Appian. How can we make it "smart", whenever i want to set up a date format in a ui field, i will have to pass which format I want and the data. This is what we are aiming for, making it understand that if I choose a "wrong" format it breaks. I would want it to behave like colors in certain components, I can only choose between few like POSITIVE, NEGATIVE or SECONDARY, for example, I want my date format set up ti suggest and accept ONLY shortDate,

I’m quite new to Appian and noticed an alignment issue within one of my interfaces. I wanted to ask whether this can be fixed or if it’s a known issue with this function. The alignment between the text and the checkbox seems a little off (I’m seeing the same issue with a!toggleField() as well), and I haven’t been able to fix it myself. Does anyone know of a workaround for this, or is this a known bug?

Hello Community, I am facing a performance issue with an API‑triggered Process Model that writes data to a MySQL database using the Write to Data Store Entity smart service. [emoticon:e7b6666c6f9742b1b7b51dddab3bb696] Scenario An external system invokes an Appian Web API. The API starts a Process Model. The Process Model creates a case by inserting ~25+ rows into a single database table. Inserts are done using Write to Data Store Entity (CDT‑based). The API response is sent only after the Process Model completes. [emoticon:e7b6666c6f9742b1b7b51dddab3bb696] Issue Total API response time is 90+ seconds. The process completes successfully and returns "Successful", but the latency is too high for synchronous API calls. Since all records are inserted into one table, this delay seems unexpected. [emoticon:e7b6666c6f9742b1b7b51dddab3bb696] Current Design  API → Process Model Multiple Write to Data Store Entity executions (likely one per record / loop)

I have two tabs with insured 1 and insured 2 and if I am updating anything in insured 2 tab and clicking on save it is always coming to insured 1 tab since while updating we are using start process link and in the process model user input task is configured, so everytime it refreshes the page after the user input task was triggered, any way to solve this?The below higlighted are the 2 insured tabs and I am updating risk factor for insured 2 tab as soon as I update it is coming to insured 1 tab.

How do you decide between using subprocesses and keeping everything in a single process model?

Hi Appian Community, I am working on a large-scale decommissioning project for a legacy system that has been active for over 15 years. We are currently on Appian 25.4 and are facing significant disk space consumption (approx. 12GB in Process Model definitions and 11GB in Engine KDBs). A major challenge is that these legacy assets do not follow any standard naming conventions or abbreviations and are scattered across multiple applications. We are currently trying to define the best criteria to categorize which objects are "Dead" and safe to delete versus which are still "Active." I am seeking best practices and recommended utilities for the following: 1. Categorization & Filtering Strategies Since naming conventions are unreliable, what parameters are most effective for identifying legacy artifacts? Are there ways to bulk-query metadata (like Last Run Date, Last Modified Date, or Total Instance Count) to distinguish between legacy and active objects? Is there

I'm planning to begin my preparation for the Analyst Credential exam (ACD301) , but I'm not sure where to find relevant study materials or sample questions that match the actual exam content. If anyone has any helpful resources or guidance to share, I’d really appreciate it. Thanks in advance!

Has anyone else noticed this in checkbox component. The expression mode does not show error when i have both saveinto and saveInto (notice the difference "i" vs "I"). I am able to save, and the selected value is not getting saved as expected. The expression mode does not show the parameter as invalid for "saveinto" and also does not save the value.   I always thought the correct syntax is saveInto with capitalized "I" Janaki Ram

I want o create two different exception paths for user input task one with timer and another one with recieve message each will go to different flow. I am using appian version 26.3 i am unable to do it as i am getting only one flow out of user input task exception. Can any one help me regarding it. If i use recieve message exception and timer symbol is changing to Home iconIf i Use only message it is showing at the same place and i am unable to move the symbols as well

In my application maker 1 &maker 2 both users submit data, if any difference between both users reviewer return the task to particular person now we are getting unmatched fileds and we are highlighting also, like this  if maker 1 give HOGN_DDA maker 2 didn't give value then reviewer return To maker 2 now the text field not highlighted, as per my knowledge we can't highlight filed without value  

A Record Action is configured to start a process model, and the process launches successfully. However, the parameterized process variables (record type and identifier) remain null or default values during runtime. As a result, the interface cannot display the expected record data.

Hi, My colleagues took ACD100 Certification earlier this year. They all had questions about Agile and SDLC.  Today I tried to take exam but I didn't see ACD100 on Examity so went for ACD101 but syllabus was different.  Anything changed recently? I can see the following exams: ACA100 - Appian Certified Analyst ACD101 - Appian Certified Associate Developer. Did anyone took exam recently and passed ACD101 and saw Agile or SDLC related questions? or is it depend on the initial question we answer about whether we took online course?

Hi Community, Let’s say I have 15 nodes in a process model. Scenario 1: The nodes are placed linearly and execute one after another. Scenario 2: The nodes are split into 5 branches, with 3 nodes in each branch, using an AND/OR gate. On testing above scenarios, when I config this inside startprocess and try to trigger it from web API, both scenarios are taking approx same time. Does appian on the backend still executes it linear irrespective of how we branch it in single process model canvas?

Hi Appian community, I've been dealing with a tricky validation problem with a!dateField and I wanted to share it here in case anyone has found a workaround. I have a form with several date fields that toggle between a!dateField (edit mode) and a!textField (read mode) based on a modify button that switches readOnly.Switching between these modes is done using a button in a separate rule; within that rule, I also have the option to save the data or exit edit mode. Once you enter edit mode, these two buttons appear. The save button is enabled or disabled based on the field validations. When the user enters a future date, I can catch it with a custom validation rule and disable the save button without issues. When the user types something completely invalid like "asdasdh" or "123abc" into the a!dateField, the native component validation fires correctly and shows the error message on the field — but Appian discards the value and stores null in the backing va

Hi everyone, I am looking to implement a Split Button functionality in my interface (a main action button with an attached dropdown for secondary actions). I am aware that this is not a native component in Appian's current UI toolkit. Has anyone successfully implemented a similar pattern using a combination of a!buttonLayout() and a!dropdown() or perhaps a custom SAIL configuration? I’ve considered using a small icon button next to the main button to trigger a menu, but I’m concerned about the alignment and the mobile responsiveness. If you have any examples or best practices on how to achieve this "split" look while maintaining a clean UX, I would greatly appreciate your insights. Thanks in advance!

Hi Community, I’m working on a UI inspired by the attached mockup. I’m aware that Appian doesn’t natively support a fixed/sticky footer within an Overlay, nor a perfect 2x2 grid inside a standard buttonLayout. However, I’m determined to get as close to this look as possible. Has anyone tried: Using a columnsLayout with Cards as buttons to simulate the 2x2 grid? Using a Header Content Layout inside the overlay to force the bottom bar to stay visible? I'd love to hear any 'outside the box' ideas to bypass the standard layout constraints and achieve this specific action-bar aesthetic.

I'm getting a problem with the 'isButtonFooterFixed' parameter in formLayout. I'm not able to get the behaviour expected when the interface is opened in a dialog. If i open another action with exactly the same configuation but in a New page instead of in a dialog box, it is working fine. Do I need to configure something else or is it just a behaviour that is not possible to achieve in Appian? Thank you!

I'm geting a problem when using the isButtonFooterFixed paramter in a FormLayout and opening it in a dialog box. The interface preview is working as expected, when opening the process in a 'NEW_PAGE' is working as expected but if I try to open the interface as a Dialog box it is not fixing the buttons in the bottom part of the modal. Anyone geting the same issue or knows how to fix it? Thank you!

I have a situation where in grid row layout, in a single column I need to have a text field and rich text display fields below the text field. See reference as below.Is it even possible?Thanks in advance.