I'll probably leave it out for now. It can be added if someone can find
a need for it.
I'm not sure where to go from here. Do I just convert the field to an id
data type, or do I deprecate it and create a new field?
-Adrian
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Adding Undefined sounds wise to me (but seems not std ?)
Jacques
From: "Adrian Crum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <dev@ofbiz.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: WorkEffort.TimeTransparency
Well, even though we would store the transparency that way, it doesn't
mean we have to present it to the user that way. In other words,
UI "Available" = TimeTransparency "TRANSPARENT"
UI "Unavailable" = TimeTransparency "OPAQUE"
I saw somewhere on the 'net where someone added a third choice -
UNDEFINED.
-Adrian
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
To be clear (from French definition in Wikipedia iCalendar)
Transparency : determines whether the resource affected at an event
is made unavailable (OPAQUE, TRANSPARENT)
From my POV, it's strange words used for availability !
Jacques
From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I know in scheduling it is if the time is free or committed.
like a task may not take any time but does have a place in the
events of doing something. Maybe a tickler to check something.
Yes it'is from Transparent/Opaque in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICalendar (actually more in
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICalendar#Ev.C3.A9nements_.28VEVENT.29)
I don't know any use in OFBiz and did not find anyting related too.
So, yes enumeration seems better than numeric. Maybe a
misinterpreatation related to windows's opacity in UI (often 0 to 10
is used) ?
Jacques
Adrian Crum wrote:
The TimeTransparency field in the WorkEffort entity appears to be
unused.
I believe the field was inspired by the iCalendar specification,
but I don't understand why it was given a numeric data type. It
seems to me this should be an enumeration: Transparent or Opaque.
Does anyone have any insight into if/how the TimeTransparency
field is used in OFBiz?
-Adrian
