Issue while Passing Dynamic parameters to the Transaction iviews from WD Java application

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

We have created a couple of SAP Transaction iViews to call the following MM transactions ME23 and ME9F for PO history and Print Preview respectively.

Now we are trying to pass PO Number dynamically to these iViews from a WebDynpro Java application. Please find the below code for the same.

WDPortalNavigation.navigateAbsolute(

"ROLES://<transaction iview pcd path>",

WDPortalNavigationMode.SHOW_EXTERNAL,

(String)null,

(String)null,

WDPortalNavigationHistoryMode.NO_DUPLICATIONS,

(String)null,

(String)null,

(String)null,

"RM06E-BSTNR=" + <PO String> + "&OKCode=AB",

false,

false

);

We are facing two issues in this process:

1. We are able to pass the PO No. into ME23 and it displays the desired results but it is inconsistent and does not work some time for the same user in the new session.

2. This Code does not work for ME9F or any other T-code which can provide the PO print preview option.

Please suggest the appropriate Method/Code/SAP transaction to cater our requirements (PO History and PO Print Preview).

Helpful answers would be rewarded.

Thanks and Regards,

Ghanshyam Agarwal

[olivier_segol]

Hello,

For ME9F and other transactions, have a look at the field name in the transaction's screen (F1 -> technical information).

For the issue with ME23, could you please explain with more details the issue?

Olivier

[Former Member]

Thanks Olivier for your response.

I have already tried the same code with the relevant screen fields for the ME9F and other transactions but its not working.

Actually these transactions are the reports basically and being associated with the transactions that's why I'm not able to call them with this method. Please suggest the proper way to call them.

I am able to pass the PO No. dynamically to ME23 by this way but its inconsistent.

For example: It is working fine most of the time but some time PO No. does not pass but OK code works fine and after trying in a new session it again passes the PO No.

I did not find the root cause behind this inconsistency. Please suggest.

Regards,

Ghanshyam