Bob Morley wrote: > > Adam Heath-2 wrote: >> introductionDate is when the store actually added the product to their >> catalog, and started making it available, which may be completely >> different then when it was first published. >> > > What struck me about this is that products in all sorts of enterprise > verticals may have a whole host of "dates" and other product metadata that > may be pertinent. As a result, I would have thought use of ProductFeature > or perhaps a ProductAttribute might be have been a better fit from a > business pov (ignoring benefits with a strongly typed field). > > When selling books, is it not possible that you have a "publish date" which > may be different from a "pre-order" date (which appears to be your use case > here)? I would want to look at the model but I would have thought that > there is some control of what products may be back-ordered (aka a pre-order) > already in place ... perhaps the only support is a boolean flag at this time > ... hmmm
Here's what we have discovered for this particular client feature. I think that introductionDate should be the time that the store first added the product, and the store itself started selling it. This would be completely different than the date the product was first produced, wheverever it is from. releaseDate may be listed at years and years in the past, but introductionDate is set in the future. In all honesty, releaseDate is just meant to be purely informational. I would love to not have to put this on Product, if someone else had a suggestion. However, I don't want to loose the typed-ness of it(which is what would happen if it were in ProductAttribute). > Definitely willing to be completely wrong here; but those things struck me > when I read this a few hours ago ...
