[Master]-Bug 645041: Expense Agent - Rename Enable approval workflow caption and tooltip - #10825
[Master]-Bug 645041: Expense Agent - Rename Enable approval workflow caption and tooltip#10825v-rohangarg20 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
AL: Apps (W1)
v-rohangarg20
changed the title
v-rohangarg20
changed the title
v-rohangarg20
changed the title
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Good Sense Reviewer - Round 1Recommendation: AcceptWhat this PR doesThis change renames the setup toggle to "Use traditional approval workflow", updates its tooltip to explain the choice against the Expense Agent approval experience, and moves it and Default Approver to Additional importance on the setup page. The diff matches the field it needs to clarify. The page control is bound to the same table field, so the caption and tooltip flow to the setup page, and the existing validation that prevents using the agent and traditional approval workflow together is unchanged. The Importance changes affect only page layout metadata and do not change approval or posting behavior. Problem-solution fitFit: Strong The bug says the setup field text was unclear about which approval experience is used. The new caption and tooltip state that the enabled state means traditional approval workflow, and the page metadata change keeps the related fields less prominent without changing their behavior. SuggestionsNo suggestions. Risk assessment and necessityRisk: The regression surface is limited to the Expense Agent Setup page and table field metadata. The change does not modify posting, approval validation, public APIs, event signatures, table schema, or upgrade data; the main UI risk is that the two fields now sit under Additional importance. Necessity: The change is needed because the old label could read as enabling the Expense Agent approval flow, while the field actually enables the traditional approval workflow and conflicts with Enable Agent. The scope is right for that problem because it only updates the visible wording and page importance.
|
| } | ||
| field(DefaultApprover; Rec."Default Approver Name") | ||
| { | ||
| Importance = Additional; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The default approver name is related to web app approval.. and this is where the end user can completely get confused. Maybe we need a separate tab for BC approval scenario. Please seek Toto's opinion.
|
|
4 participants
Fixes AB#645041
Issue: On the Expense Agent Setup page the "Enable approval workflow" toggle had a generic caption and tooltip that did not make clear it switches expense reports to the traditional approval workflow instead of the Expense Agent approval experience, and it sat at standard importance among unrelated controls.
Cause: The field was labelled "Enable approval workflow" with a tooltip that only stated approval workflow is enabled, and used default Importance, so its purpose relative to the Expense Agent experience was ambiguous on the page.
Solution: Renamed the caption to "Use traditional approval workflow" and updated the tooltip to "Specifies whether expense reports use the traditional approval workflow instead of the Expense Agent approval experience." Set this field and the related Default Approver field to Importance = Additional so they surface only when relevant, per review feedback on the work item.