Is there a way of seeing who has read a document in solman?

[Former Member]

Hi All,

We are using solman to store project documents and wish to review who of the team has read them.  That's not 'checked out/in' or modified, but read or opened them.  Does anyone know of any auditing that's standard within solman to do this?

Many thanks,

Graham

[former_member272676 · Accepted solution]

Hi Graham,

if the user the change some thing in will be recorded in the log. But for the displaying of some documents  or application can not be created any log.  If you assign the authorization"Display" for  the user, the user can see that. Why do you need the log for that? If you want to really controll all steps in your project? If you don't allowed the displaying of the documents for any user, this user can not see the documents and he will ask to you to see of this document....

Best regards,

Volkan

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Volkan,

Thanks for this information as it's what I suspected.  The somewhat odd reason for this question is that we want to check that the appropriate persons have read certain documents without forcing them to.  This way we could ascertain that all design documents are properly considered when building solutions.   Being able to see whom has read or viewed the document, rather than amended it, would  have been helpful in this regard,

Once again, thanks for your clarification.

warm regards,

Graham

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

When a document is opened in the documentation tab of SOLAR02, the method GET_DOCUMENT of class CL_SA_TAB_DOCU will be called. The opened document will be contained in the reference variable DOC_OBJECT at the end of the method.

If you need the information for reporting purposes only, it should be pretty straight forward to enhance the method to write statistics to a Z table which you can then report on.

Another idea is to utilize KW since all Solution Manager documents are stored in KW. I would assume KW has some functionality regarding access statistics, etc. Maybe worth looking into.