flowExecutionKey

[Cantor, Scott]

On 7/2/14, 5:35 PM, "Marvin Addison" <marvin.addison at gmail.com> wrote:

>> No, I just made the form action "flowExecutionUrl".
>
>Oh, sure, that's fine. Now that you mention it, that's probably
>equally if not more common. You could also point the action to the
>flow URL and set _flowExecutionKey hidden field to the value of the
>well-known request attribute flowExecutionKey.

Ok, they didn't happen to mention flowExecutionKey as predefined in the
docs. I probably have some other places I can leverage that instead of
walking the API. But even if I used that, if I kept the action as
flowExecutionUrl, there would end up being both a query parameter and a
form parameter, and that seems like the worst option. That could also
break some tools anyway.

>That said, I see no reason to change. I would think that any test
>framework would be able to extract the form action and post to that
>URL, so I'm not exactly sure what's wrong with Nate's test script. In
>my experience it can be either a POST or querystring parameter, and it
>looks like it's the former in the request he cited, so I would expect
>that to work.

Ok, just making sure I wasn't missing some obvious practice.

-- Scott