"Bruce W. Hoylman" wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Gunther" == Gunther Birznieks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gunther> This first criteria seems a tad odd to me. What business
> Gunther> scenario is there for this?
>
> The framework is to support an intranet time tracking application. The
> business rules of the system dictate there are no deletions of
> previously submitted time ... only inserts/updates. Therefore I can say
> without question that an existing time record will *always* exist (a
> modify), albeit in a potentially 'dirty' state (rule #2).
>
> Furthermore, if a particular time period has not been accounted for,
> i.e. no time record has been previously submitted, a default time
> record will be presented for modification, and subsequent submission (an
> insert). This is seamless to the client requesting the period. If
> there is no default time record available, then a 0-hour time record is
> presented for modification/submission (also an insert).
need custom record locking?
how about adding a field such as 'lock' which is set
when a record is requested, so only one user can modify it?
i.e. your script sends a flag to others who've requested a
'lock'ed record. i'd also put a timeout on it so that if a
user quits his browser or gets distracted, his page gets
updated to another location after freeing up the lock...
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Their is five errers in this sentance.
