• RE: Increasing Bar Code Recognition in v7 and above

    Kim,

    Just to make sure folks aren't put off by the idea of single-character barcodes, I'd like to reiterate they work fine across the board as long as devices are configured for it. In DocuWare it is the setting described above, and for some barcode readers you may need to talk to support and get a special setting configured. I bought a Nadamoo USB barcode reader and had to email them about it. Overnight they sent me a system barcode I could print out and scan, and now the gun reads single-character barcodes (numeric or alphabetic) perfectly.

    In any other scenario it is the fault of how the barcodes are being generated and/or the printer printing them. We use standard Code128 across the board, and I can read every barcode with my iPhone (no special changes needed), Android tablet (no special changes needed), Motorola industrial handheld computer (no special changes needed), USB scan gun (system barcode required), and DocuWare scanner (VintaSoft settings change).

    I guess I would say single-character barcodes aren't just possible, they should be the norm. If it won't scan with RedLaser on an iPhone, the barcode itself is malformed and nothing will read it. Are they best to avoid or work around? Maybe, but that's not always possible. Even barcoding something like a first name means some folks will just have a single character there, e.g. just the initial.

    Workarounds that work are wonderful though.  *smile*

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
     
  • RE: Increasing Bar Code Recognition in v7 and above

    Kim,

    DocuWare can totally handle barcodes of length 1. That's what the setting:
     
    MinimalBarcodeLength="1"

    in the VintaSoft settings file I posted is for. We have been handling single-character barcodes for two years now. Install a barcode reader on your phone and scan a single-character code -- should work, and should also work in DocuWare. Though, it is possible the barcode-writing tool itself does not handle single-character codes, which would be a function of your barcode generator (ours handles them fine).

    Sounds like your solution works just as well, though, and lots of devices and scanner have issues with single-character barcodes.

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: Email Notification received with wrong time for Index Field

    Phillip,

    DocuWare stores all timestamp indexes in UTC time (like GMT). It would appear that when fields are sent out as part of a notification they come out as their literal stored date/time without being translated into any other time zone. This makes sense, as what if the email is sent to someone halfway across the world? Would you want to show the time as it was stored from a specific client location, or just treat everything as UTC so various destinations can shift accordingly?

    The reason the indexes in the web client view show as local time is because all timestamps are converted back to the timezone of the one currently viewing the information.

    I am curious to see what DocuWare support has to say, though, as I could see you wanting the time to be translated into some other time zone...

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: Increasing Bar Code Recognition in v7 and above

    Kim,

    Hi, Kim, long time no see!

    Just a bit over two years ago after initial roll-out (a Fortis migration that you assisted with), we were seeing a 5-10% failure rate of barcodes as well, on everything from splitter/ID barcodes to index fields (we use a lot of barcoded scan sheets). One of our scan sheets has something like 20 barcodes on it.

    I spent two days testing batch after batch, just trying to increase accuracy. I ran across the same article you found, but it didn't go deep enough. DocuWare support was, in a word, unsupportive. They did tell me more about some of the other VintaSoft settings, but basically said don't mess with them (or gave a standard, "Well, if you do touch them you are on your own, and they won't make any difference anyway.") They were wrong.

    It took me a long time to start tweaking the ExpectedNoBarcodes setting because I thought it meant that the import should expect "no" barcodes. Turns out it is just a really stupidly named parameter that means "expected NUMBER of barcodes", and it was set to 0 by default (because, remember, it wasn't supposed to have any effect on anything anyway). I also researched that the higher the number, the more it could affect performance.

    The bottom line is that everyone was wrong. I upped ExpectedNoBarcodes to 99, and BAM! The next three test runs I did had 100% barcode accuracy, and the scan job did not run appreciably slower. And we have seen pretty much 100% accuracy for 2 years now. Some printers still print unreadable separator/ID barcodes (which is weird), but by and large we are chugging through thousands of barcodes a day with perfect scanning.

    Below are the notes I took about the additional fields in the VintaSoft settings (with my ExpectedNoBarcodes comments asterisked):

    ==================

    10/06/2017 - Additional information from DocuWare tech support:

    TradeOff is the option which tries to bring together speed and quality. The possible values are BestSpeed, Balanced, BestQuality. In case barcodes are not recognized (especially smaller barcodes) then switch to BestQuality. This will decrease performance and increase the average number of recognized garbage barcodes. Changing the trade off can make things better, but also worse. So be careful. When changing the trade off the quality threshold should be adapted (the higher the trade off the lower the quality threshold).

    All other mentioned setting should not be touched, that's why they are not included in the faq.

    ExpectedNoBarcodes
    Possible values are: any integer number equal or larger than zero
    Default value: 0
    *** Set this value to 99 to make sure the VintaSoft engine reads all barcodes on a page and doesn't stop prematurely! ***

    QualityThreshold
    Possible values are: 0.00 - 1.00
    Default value: 0.20

    ConfidenceThreshold
    Possible values are: 0.00 - 1.00
    Default value: 0.95
    ==================

    Here is the full VintaSoft.settings file we use, where we have everything commented out except Code128 barcodes:

    ==============================
    <?xml version="1.0"?>
    <BarcodeSettings xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" TradeOff="BestSpeed" MinimalBarcodeLength="1" ExpectedNoBarcodes="99" RenderResolution="300" Iso15415Threshold="-1.0" Iso15416Threshold="-1.0" QualityThreshold="0.2" ConfidenceThreshold="0.95" Erode="false" AutomaticMode="true" xmlns="http://dev.docuware.com/settings/barcode/configuration">
      <BarcodeTypes>
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="C25Interleaved" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Code39" />-->
        <BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Code128" />
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Ean128" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="EanExt5" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="EanExt2" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Code93" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Codabar" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Ean13" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Ean8" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="C25Industrial" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="UpcA" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="UpcE" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Code11" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="MSI" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="RSS" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Postal" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="PatchCode" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Telepen" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Aztec" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="DataMatrix" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="QR" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="PDF417" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="MaxiCode" />-->     
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Pharmacode" />-->    
      </BarcodeTypes>
      <Iso15415BarcodeTypes>
      </Iso15415BarcodeTypes>
      <Iso15416BarcodeTypes>
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="Code128" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="C25Interleaved" />-->
        <!--<BarcodeType DwBarcodeType="UpcE" />-->
      </Iso15416BarcodeTypes>
    </BarcodeSettings>
    ==========================================

    I do not know how DW 7.1 does things on the Desktop, but hopefully you can still swap out the settings file, restart desktop services, and try to scan again. Hopefully it increases your accuracy.

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: Upload a documant with index data via java script

    Martin,

    The .NET code is just a wrapper around the Platform SDK resources which can be called from any language. If you do a Google search on the following:

    docuware platform "non-.net"

    you will find several posts about that. More recently, DocuWare has even released a Postman collection of examples that illustrate how to perform calls to the Platform SDK from any web-capable language or scripting tool (e.g. curl):

    https://developer.docuware.com/rest/examples/postman-collection-download.html

    There is also a link to some node.js examples there which may translate more easily into JavaScript...

    Good luck!

    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: Total count of documents in archive

    Craig, good info! I thought it only showed # of documents if full-text was turned on for the cabinet, but it shows for any cabinet (and I confirmed this still works in 6.11).

    The SQL query will only work on-premise, correct? Or is there another spot to do free-text SQL querying on the data (that exists in the cloud version)?

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: REST API : Document searches by fields

    Florian,

    Thank you for the definitive response!

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: Total count of documents in archive

    Ronald,

    By "archive" I assume you mean file cabinet? 

    I am not seeing a way to get the number back from any tool or even the Platform SDK. Everything is paged and asynchronous, topping out at whatever limit is set for searches.

    However, if you are on-premise then you can access the database directly to get the number of documents in a cabinet. Are you on-premise? And what version of DW?

    Finally, if you have access to the server data storage area, you can simply check the properties of the folder containing the documents for the cabinet. Of course, that would require an on-premise situation as well.

    It would be great to have a way to know the total number when a system is in the cloud...

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman
  • RE: REST API : Document searches by fields

    Florian,

    Thanks for the input! While we have you here, can you address the original issue? I appreciate the documentation link, but the documentation is actually part of the problem in this case. Here, the "q" parameter is not mentioned or used:

    https://developer.docuware.com/dotNet_CodeExamples/f9a6a984-57a9-42e9-8d26-1dd35611cf47.html?q=GetFromDocumentsForDocumentsQueryResultAsync

    But this still lists "q" as a valid parameter (though it is part of an extension method):

    https://developer.docuware.com/dotNet_API_Reference/PlatformServerClient/DocuWare.Platform.ServerClient.SchemaExtensions.html#DocuWare_Platform_ServerClient_SchemaExtensions_GetFromDocumentsForDocumentsQueryResultAsync_DocuWare_Platform_ServerClient_ServiceConnection_System_String_System_String_System_String___System_String___System_Nullable_System_Int32__System_Nullable_System_Int32__System_Nullable_System_Int32__System_String_System_Nullable_System_Boolean__

    So, is "q" supposed to work, or not? Can you shed any light on the internal server error, "The given key was not present in the dictionary" that we both see when we try to query directly from the file cabinet? If it is broken, any plan on fixing it? It is frustrating when documentation says something should be doable but then it doesn't work.

    The "Get Documents" portion of the Postman collection is not helpful either, as it only utilizes count, fields, and going after a document by specific ID in the examples. Querying for a document (directly from the file cabinet) via the "q" parameter is not illustrated. Only searching via a dialog is exemplified further down in the collection. (EDIT: Trying to use the "q" parameter in the Postman samples for directly accessing documents from the cabinet fails with the same error no matter what query expression is passed in...)

    Can we get a definitive answer on the "q" parameter as used in GetFromDocumentsForDocumentsQueryResultAsync()?

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman

  • RE: REST API : Document searches by fields

    We amateurs can get a lot done if we stick together.  *smile*

    On a thread long ago (trying to get the DW Platform SDK working from Visual Foxpro) I got to the point of saying I would just fill out a support ticket. Problem is, DocuWare will not give in-depth support on the Platform SDK unless you specifically license that level of support. I think it was a reasonable figure if you are doing a lot of implementing (like $1000-$1500/year), but that didn't make sense for us since we are just one installation (I am not a consultant or reseller, just a guy working for a company that had to switch migrate from Fortis to DocuWare).

    When I was told I wouldn't get any help without ponying up what would have been about a 20-25% license increase for us, that's when I started using Fiddler and Postman to figure out what was going on (mainly with authentication). I also use a lot of integration with a C# wrapper program I wrote where a bunch of common functions are exposed via command line.

    DocuWare may have changed their licensing scheme since them, so you could always try to ask these questions via an "official" support ticket to see what they would say (then post here, please!). In my experience, there are quite a few commercial tools out there with a powerful API obfuscated by marginal documentation and developer support that costs extra... But you can still give it a try!

    Thanks,
    Joe Kaufman