Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - Learn all about PTC Community Badges. Engage with PTC and see how many you can earn! X

Is there a possibility to give out all definition done in ILM "Workflow and Documents"


Is there a possibility to give out all definition done in ILM "Workflow and Documents"

For documentation purposes as well as for getting something like a complete data model I like to give out every admin object with it's references

from our Workflow and Documents module.

To our solution:

We have defined own (==> from PTC Solution deviating) types and several other objects belonging to this (incl. Scripts).

I now like to give out all of this stuff including infos:

  • for a certain object:  what does it include ?
  • for a certain object:  where is used ?
  • for a certain object:  how has it been set up ?

Reason:  Get an overview which allows to see where a change will be effective.

Does anyone have an idea how to do this ?

Waiting for any idea....



Do you mean "ALM" and not "ILM"?


ILM ==  Integrity Lifecycle Manager  (Tool)

ALM ==  Application Lifecycle Management  (Intended working area for Integrity)

In the end I like to give out everything that is defined in our Integrity Module  "Workflow and Documents".

Hello Klaus,

There are some Solutions called

* Integrity Docs, (I thinkt this is what you want!)

* Integrity ACL Analyser

* Types and Fields (JSP)

which are not actively maintained, but you can get them from your PTC Consultant.




Hello Daniel,

no, I haven't thought about Documents but about everything what is defined in:

  • Types
  • Fields
  • Trigger
  • ...

AND from a case some years ago I've got a file to give out that stuff (prepared for 10.4), but trying to use it on our system (also 10.4) it fails.

Sorry, I have found it this morning, otherwise I would have raised my question different.

I add that file "".

This seems to be a script not-published by PTC. I think I need to raise an ID.

Hello Klaus,

Yes, we used IntegrityDocs (same version as you already have). I only had to Change the IC_HOME to

SET IC_HOME=C:\Program Files (x86)\Integrity\IntegrityClient10

It run under 10.4 - but currently we don't use it any more since after the upgrade to 10.8 something has broken (I assume API changes).

If you submit an idea to integrate IntegrityDocs into Integrity I will vote vor it ...


Hello Klaus Hoppe,

Much of this should all be possible for an administrator from the command line. Assuming you're using Windows:

    • For Types, run:
      1. im types > %USERPROFILE%\Desktop\TypesSelection.txt
      2. im viewtype -F %USERPROFILE%\Desktop\TypesSelection.txt > %USERPROFILE%\Desktop\TypesDefinitions.txt

Note the lack of spaces in the path to the output files.


There are similar commands for fields, projects, states, triggers, users, reports, charts, queries, and dynamic group (you can browse to them from the reference links above).  Note that triggers also have the trigger recipe component, and reports have the report recipe component.

This won't let you trivially re-create those components by using a im createFOO command, because the structure for creating the items is not output, but the details are output in a human readable format, which seems to be what you're asking for.

Kind Regards,

Kind Regards,
Kael Lizak

Senior Technical Support Engineer
PTC Integrity Lifecycle Manager

This will bring out all the definitions, but separated from each other.

The IntegrityDocs Solution bring out correlated infos with additonal content like Type of Link and many other.

This is a complete different approach, which helps to see interaction.

Thus the info is only partly an answer, but I'm afraid there is no complete answer available.

With this statement I like to close the discussion reminding of the link to new idea in my last posting before.


Hello Klaus Hoppe,

If you still need assistance with this, can you please let us know the challenge(s) you are still facing?

It looks like Kael's solution is correct, would you please take the next step and mark this answer as "Correct Answer"?

This way other users reading the thread will know there is a solution, and which answer is correct. In addition, it makes the solution easier to find.

Thank you,


Top Tags