<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic I would always start with… in Product Forum</title>
    <link>https://community.blueprism.com/t5/Product-Forum/Exception-Type-naming-convention/m-p/79082#M31032</link>
    <description>I would always start with types that indicate either a problem that should not have happened and a case that was deliberately rejected, ie system exception and business exception. The first type may need a fix and the second is by design and does not. You could argue that there is a third category to indicate 'a problem that has caused the process to terminate but does not mean the process is faulty', eg when an application won't launch.
From there you can create sub-categories based on these main types.</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2018 18:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>John__Carter</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-11-20T18:02:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Exception Type - naming convention</title>
      <link>https://community.blueprism.com/t5/Product-Forum/Exception-Type-naming-convention/m-p/79081#M31031</link>
      <description>Hello,

I would like to ask for suggestion, how to name Exception Types in general. Our practice result in 6 main types:


	Business System Input - input missing data to continue process
	Business Request Input - after read data in one of platform missing information to continue process
	Business System Locked - time/temporary recognized system , suspension of system operation
	Element Missing - Caused by missing element from Application Modeler
	Process Exception - application not attached/windows process not exist
	System Exception - rare situation, where we identify application can cause some errors


Could you share your opinions about the topis ? Please do not write anything in style: why we use Exception Type in theory :)

Regards,

PaweÅ‚

&amp;nbsp;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2018 20:11:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.blueprism.com/t5/Product-Forum/Exception-Type-naming-convention/m-p/79081#M31031</guid>
      <dc:creator>PawełMiżwa</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-11-19T20:11:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I would always start with…</title>
      <link>https://community.blueprism.com/t5/Product-Forum/Exception-Type-naming-convention/m-p/79082#M31032</link>
      <description>I would always start with types that indicate either a problem that should not have happened and a case that was deliberately rejected, ie system exception and business exception. The first type may need a fix and the second is by design and does not. You could argue that there is a third category to indicate 'a problem that has caused the process to terminate but does not mean the process is faulty', eg when an application won't launch.
From there you can create sub-categories based on these main types.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2018 18:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.blueprism.com/t5/Product-Forum/Exception-Type-naming-convention/m-p/79082#M31032</guid>
      <dc:creator>John__Carter</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-11-20T18:02:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

