Re: Need for ProductRole

[David E. Jones]

Yeah, ProductCategoryRole might be a good model for multiple manufacturers as 
well, but in a way it would be nice if it were more directly associated with a 
Product... so I can see that being a possible way to go as well. I guess it 
depends on how it would actually be used by the people and the automated 
processes... Is this something that anyone actually has a need and scenarios 
for right now?

-David


Adrian Crum wrote:

I'm looking over David's suggestion of using ProductCategoryRole. Multiple manufacturers could be handled that way - then just ignore the manufacturer field in Product.

Chris Howe wrote:

So, we could have a Product Category called "XYZ Manufacturing Products" then the products they manufacture could be linked to that category. The company itself can be linked to the category through the party ID in the role of manufacturer. Manufacturers and Suppliers are different parties, btw. A supplier could provide the same part from several manufacturers.

Technically, I would think you should make them two
separate products and then relate the two products as
equivelents.  But of course that depends on how
detailed the company wants to be.  Aside from making
them two seperate products, you could treat the
manufacturers as seperate suppliers for the same
generic product.

However, I can think of an example where the current
structure is limiting.  When the manufacturer or
product line is acquired by another company.

--- Adrian Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

There are many examples of standard products that

time this was discussed - the same holds true there.

It IS a limitation. It will come up again, and when
it does, I'll continue to make the same suggestion.


Chris Howe wrote:

can come from multiple manufacturers. If I have a hardware store and I sell 3/4 inch galvanized pipe tees, they could come from three or four different manufacturers. Should I have a separate 3/4 inch galvanized tee product for each manufacturer? I hope not! I used the example of electronic components the last

why would you have more than one manufacturer for

the

same product?  wouldn't that make it a different
product?  I agree that it would be better for a

more

generic product role setup, but if all the roles

are

addressed AND it's not limiting, why go through

the

trouble of refactoring?

--- Adrian Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I know about the manufacturer field in the Product

That's the limitation that brought forth my original suggestion.

Why have a dozen different entities linking

entity. What do you do if there is more than one manufacturer for a product?

products

to a dozen different party roles? We could have one entity that links

products

to any party - regardless of their role.

So, one entity could link a product to one or more

suppliers, one or more manufacturers, one or more product managers, etc.

It

seems more flexible to me.


Chris Howe wrote:

The manufacturer is desribed in the Product

entity.

The only other relationship to a product that I

can

think of is the supplier and that is desribed in

the

SupplierProduct entity.  Having a product

manager,

again is probably managed easiest by putting the
product into a productCategory and managing the
productCategoryRoles on that. Outside of those
relationships, can you think of another that

would

have to do with a product?

--- Adrian Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I had suggested some time ago a

ProductRelationship

entity - where a product can be related to a party, such as a manufacturer.

Would

something like that meet your needs?


Al Byers wrote:

I think I have a need for a ProductRole that

mirrors the ContentRole

entity. I want to associate a manager with a

product. Is there another

way to do this? If not, should I just create

such

an entity for this

custom use or should it be something to propose

for general use?

-Al

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature