Linking E10 Document Type to ECM Content Type

I was under the impression that they just had to be the same, but this doesn’t appear to be the case. I would like to be able to drag and drop a file to a receipt line with the Document Type “RCVDOC” and have that be picked up by the workflow assigned to the “RCVDOC” Content Type in ECM.

I was able to get the document to go from E10 to ECM by dragging and dropping, but it landed in a different Content Type than expected.

Would this be done on the server-side ECM configuration?

Another question…it looks like it came over to ECM with the key fields like pack slip, pack line, etc. but no company ID. Is there a way to bring that in or do I have to set up a different Document Type in each company with the ID as a suffix so I can parse it out in ECM?

@fredmeissner Epicor instructs that all content types that would be equal across ERP and ECM should be created in ERP. When you do that, it will create an ECM content type with an “_CompanyID” appended to it.

What I have found is that you do not need to, but it makes it easier from a security standpoint in that you don’t get multi-company cross-over with attachment permissions.

Ours are set up correctly and I manage the additional data elements form the ERP UI menu for Document Meta Data. This allows you to specify what additional transactional data fields are sent toe ECM with the document. Otherwise, it only sends the key data needed to do a datalink and retrieve any additional field data you would like to have in ECM.

When I try to save the metadata I get this error:

The connection to DocStar is working:

I checked that box, clicked “Clear History”, clicked OK, and then logged back in. It didn’t make a difference unfortunately.

when you get the message, click the detail button and post the screenshot.

I’d double-check that you haven’t inadvertently altered admin@docstar.com’s security profile. That error message looks like it’s having trouble making the new content field in ECM using the API.

Make sure the user, security class, content type, etc. in ECM all allow that user to alter them.

1 Like

I don’t see admin@docstar.com in the user list, even though I can log in to the account. Do I have to “create” it so I can add it the appropriate security classes?

When I am logged into ECM through this user I can change the security classes, the content types, etc.

I can’t recall where admin@docstar.com sits in the security groups, but I suspect it’s the Administrators group - and that group needs to Admin Rights for “Fields”. It’s on the Admin - Groups - Admin Permissions section of the screen.

That group has all permissions enabled, though I don’t see admin@docstar.com in the user list. I am assuming that’s because it’s a built-in admin account?

I’ve been thinking about this all weekend, and there is something else going on.

The Content type in ECM doesn’t already have a company field? (Trying to create a duplicate field?) Usually, the ECM Content type has an appended _Company - make sure you’re checking the correct one.

Try another content type - create a new one in ERP, make sure it shows up in ECM. Then add a field, etc. Test this all around to determine if the process is broken, or just the content type is having an issue.

Your setup and mine are the same, so if you can find nothing else, I’m thinking you need to open a ticket with Support.

That’s a good idea, I did what you suggested. I am still getting the error. I also tried adding the field in ECM and then adding the same field as metadata in ERP but that didn’t work either; same error. I did open a Support ticket last week, so we’ll see where that takes us. Thank you for the help so far!

We found a few things, maybe this will help.

Another way to trigger the error is to click “Create Company Folder” in Attachment Type Maintenance for the DocStar storage type.

This, as well as adding metadata, works fine in one of our companies.

any news on the EpicCare ticket?

This still sounds like the permissions are messed up. I know ECM’s security model is a bit strange with certain permissions at different levels.

They’re still looking into it.