Hi, workflow gurus.
Question is about workflow initiator definition in a local workflow.
In my workflow there are, for this moment, two event creators (callers), each of them calls for the same local generic workflow and passes event specific parameters, for instance, the user name of a current step approver. I use a local workflow in order to increase reuse and make approve process more generic.
My local workflow contains from a user decision, if user approves the decision, we returned to the main workflow and continue process approve execution, otherwise we send a message to WF inbox to the main workflow initiator, who ran the workflow. This email should contain the following text: «Dear, &_Wf_Initiator_&, the process you had launched has been declined by %_Current_Approver_Uname%». Such as if John executed the main WF and Andrew declined it, thus John will get the following message: «Dear, USJohn, the process you had launched has been declined by USAndrew».
There is no problem with passing %_Current_Approver_Uname% in the message, I use a regular binding via local event, the problem is with passing WF initiator user name. As I thought, a local workflow has absolutely the same WF initiator user name, as the main WF, who called for this local WF. But when I send my message I got something like «Dear, USAndrew, the process you had launched has been declined by USAndrew» instead of desired message text.
My questions are:
1. Does local WF always inherits by default a WF initiator value from a main WF's initiator or a local WF may have his own WF initiator?
Short form of this question may be expressed as: Is the following statement is correct
localWF._WFInitiator = mainWF._WFInitiator.
2. Why in my case local WF initiator has the same value, as a current approver, which has been passed via binding (the only value, that was binded)? I got «Dear, USAndrew, the process you had launched has been declined by USAndrew» instead of «Dear, USJohn, the process you had launched has been declined by USAndrew»?
Thanks.