Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
YupI'm using that Beta against my 76.04 server without issue :) On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > ** > > We are still on 7.6.04 SP3 though – they intend to go to the later patch > as its recommended. > > > > Is it backward compatible with 7.6.04 if I download the version meant for > 8.1? > > > > Joe > > > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 15, 2014 4:27 PM > > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view > fields found in COM:Company.. > > > > ** > > I would personally download from > *Latest Beta Versions* > > Check out the What's New <http://arinside.com/wiki/ARInsideWhatsNew310> > section, > to find out more informations about the changes in the recent beta version. > > *Description* > > *ARAPI used* > > *supported server version* > > *Recommended* > > ARInside-3.1.0-beta-win32 <http://arinside.org/downloads/37> > > 8.1 > > 6.3 - 8.1 > > Yes > > ARInside-3.1.0-beta-win64 <http://arinside.org/downloads/36> > > 8.1 > > 6.3 - 8.1 > > > > > > and I use the 64 bit version here at workI wouldn't expect it to work > better or worse, just more memory allocation :)...which isn't really needed. > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > > ** > > This may be a silly question. This is the *Latest Downloads* table I > copied from the web page. > > > > *Description* > > *ARAPI used* > > *supported server version* > > *Recommended* > > ARInside-3.0.3-win32-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/32> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > Yes > > ARInside-3.0.3-win64-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/31> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > > > ARInside-3.0.3-solaris10sparc-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/34> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > > > ARInside-3.0.3-linux-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/35> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > > > ARInside-3.0.3-source-code <http://arinside.org/downloads/33> > > > > > > > > > > Does this mean it is recommended to use the 32 bit windows version over > the 64? What may go wrong with the 64 if I selected that? I’m on a 64 bit > Windows 7 Home Edition on my personal laptop that I would be using. > > > > Joe > > > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:49 PM > > > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view > fields found in COM:Company.. > > > > ** > > Well, there's no time like the present to download a new copy :) > > > > http://arinside.com/ > > > > Check out the beta, new features, and no current problems reported :) > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > > ** > > I do not actually have that tool anymore – I used to have it during the > 6.3 days J for some documentation work that I needed to do. > > > > Mark Brittain, who is currently working with the client I’m with on this > engagement, made a mention of AR Utilities yesterday. I think he does have > it so will ask him if he can. > > > > Meanwhile, I was thinking of enabling Object Relationships at some point > later, as it has not yet been on development here. But since it’s a one > time high cost operation, have not got down to getting permission to get it > done – mostly because I have not started with any real development work yet. > > > > I’m suspecting all of these fields with the exception of Company ID, are > fields that were created either as a part of a copy paste operation and > intended to be deleted later, but never were.. There is even a *z1D > Company Type* field on there that is optional when it probably should > have been a display only field. I won’t swear it should have been a Display > Only field though as I have not checked its underlying workflow as well.. > > > > Joe > > > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:16 PM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view > fields
Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
We are still on 7.6.04 SP3 though - they intend to go to the later patch as its recommended. Is it backward compatible with 7.6.04 if I download the version meant for 8.1? Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 4:27 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company.. ** I would personally download from Latest Beta Versions Check out the <http://arinside.com/wiki/ARInsideWhatsNew310> What's New section, to find out more informations about the changes in the recent beta version. Description ARAPI used supported server version Recommended <http://arinside.org/downloads/37> ARInside-3.1.0-beta-win32 8.1 6.3 - 8.1 Yes <http://arinside.org/downloads/36> ARInside-3.1.0-beta-win64 8.1 6.3 - 8.1 and I use the 64 bit version here at workI wouldn't expect it to work better or worse, just more memory allocation :)...which isn't really needed. On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: ** This may be a silly question. This is the Latest Downloads table I copied from the web page. Description ARAPI used supported server version Recommended ARInside-3.0.3-win32-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/32> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 Yes ARInside-3.0.3-win64-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/31> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 ARInside-3.0.3-solaris10sparc-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/34> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 ARInside-3.0.3-linux-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/35> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 ARInside-3.0.3-source-code <http://arinside.org/downloads/33> Does this mean it is recommended to use the 32 bit windows version over the 64? What may go wrong with the 64 if I selected that? I'm on a 64 bit Windows 7 Home Edition on my personal laptop that I would be using. Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:49 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company.. ** Well, there's no time like the present to download a new copy :) http://arinside.com/ Check out the beta, new features, and no current problems reported :) On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: ** I do not actually have that tool anymore - I used to have it during the 6.3 days :-) for some documentation work that I needed to do. Mark Brittain, who is currently working with the client I'm with on this engagement, made a mention of AR Utilities yesterday. I think he does have it so will ask him if he can. Meanwhile, I was thinking of enabling Object Relationships at some point later, as it has not yet been on development here. But since it's a one time high cost operation, have not got down to getting permission to get it done - mostly because I have not started with any real development work yet. I'm suspecting all of these fields with the exception of Company ID, are fields that were created either as a part of a copy paste operation and intended to be deleted later, but never were.. There is even a z1D Company Type field on there that is optional when it probably should have been a display only field. I won't swear it should have been a Display Only field though as I have not checked its underlying workflow as well.. Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:16 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company.. ** Does an ARInside of those fields show anything interesting? On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: ** There are some fields found in COM:Company, either found in the Miscellaneous tab, or hidden or both, or out of all views, that I would like to know if they served any real functional purpose in ITSM. Company ID - Field ID 26032 This is an indexed field so may probably be used in some of the searches in workflow. Is it used for anything other than a manual search for a company name by its ID? We do use it internally here for reporting and other things but wanted to know the application specific purpose of it if there is. Lead Time (Days) - Field ID 26013 Really??? Lead time for what? I could understand if it was a part of an asset - where you can have lead time for delivery or installation or both.. But for a company? I'm guessing its one of those fields that may have crept in as a part of a copy paste operation while creating fields for the COM:Company form and remained there as a ghost field and t
Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
I would personally download from Latest Beta Versions Check out the What's New <http://arinside.com/wiki/ARInsideWhatsNew310> section, to find out more informations about the changes in the recent beta version. *Description**ARAPI used**supported server version**Recommended* ARInside-3.1.0-beta-win32 <http://arinside.org/downloads/37>8.16.3 - 8.1Yes ARInside-3.1.0-beta-win64 <http://arinside.org/downloads/36>8.16.3 - 8.1 and I use the 64 bit version here at workI wouldn't expect it to work better or worse, just more memory allocation :)...which isn't really needed. On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > ** > > This may be a silly question. This is the *Latest Downloads* table I > copied from the web page. > > > > *Description* > > *ARAPI used* > > *supported server version* > > *Recommended* > > ARInside-3.0.3-win32-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/32> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > Yes > > ARInside-3.0.3-win64-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/31> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > > > ARInside-3.0.3-solaris10sparc-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/34> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > > > ARInside-3.0.3-linux-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/35> > > 7.6 > > 6.3 - 7.6 > > > > ARInside-3.0.3-source-code <http://arinside.org/downloads/33> > > > > > > > > > > Does this mean it is recommended to use the 32 bit windows version over > the 64? What may go wrong with the 64 if I selected that? I’m on a 64 bit > Windows 7 Home Edition on my personal laptop that I would be using. > > > > Joe > > > ---------------------- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:49 PM > > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view > fields found in COM:Company.. > > > > ** > > Well, there's no time like the present to download a new copy :) > > > > http://arinside.com/ > > > > Check out the beta, new features, and no current problems reported :) > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > > ** > > I do not actually have that tool anymore – I used to have it during the > 6.3 days J for some documentation work that I needed to do. > > > > Mark Brittain, who is currently working with the client I’m with on this > engagement, made a mention of AR Utilities yesterday. I think he does have > it so will ask him if he can. > > > > Meanwhile, I was thinking of enabling Object Relationships at some point > later, as it has not yet been on development here. But since it’s a one > time high cost operation, have not got down to getting permission to get it > done – mostly because I have not started with any real development work yet. > > > > I’m suspecting all of these fields with the exception of Company ID, are > fields that were created either as a part of a copy paste operation and > intended to be deleted later, but never were.. There is even a *z1D > Company Type* field on there that is optional when it probably should > have been a display only field. I won’t swear it should have been a Display > Only field though as I have not checked its underlying workflow as well.. > > > > Joe > > > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:16 PM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view > fields found in COM:Company.. > > > > ** > > Does an ARInside of those fields show anything interesting? > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > > ** > > There are some fields found in COM:Company, either found in the > Miscellaneous tab, or hidden or both, or out of all views, that I would > like to know if they served any real functional purpose in ITSM. > > > > *Company ID** – Field ID 26032* > > This is an indexed field so may probably be used in some of the searches > in workflow. Is it used for anything other than a manual search for a > company name by its ID? We do use it internally here for reporting and > other things but wanted to know the application specific purpose of it if > there is. > > > > *Lead Time (Days)** – Field ID 26013* > > Really??? Lead time for what? I could understand if it was a part of an > asset – where you can
Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
This may be a silly question. This is the Latest Downloads table I copied from the web page. Description ARAPI used supported server version Recommended ARInside-3.0.3-win32-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/32> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 Yes ARInside-3.0.3-win64-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/31> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 ARInside-3.0.3-solaris10sparc-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/34> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 ARInside-3.0.3-linux-binary <http://arinside.org/downloads/35> 7.6 6.3 - 7.6 ARInside-3.0.3-source-code <http://arinside.org/downloads/33> Does this mean it is recommended to use the 32 bit windows version over the 64? What may go wrong with the 64 if I selected that? I'm on a 64 bit Windows 7 Home Edition on my personal laptop that I would be using. Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:49 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company.. ** Well, there's no time like the present to download a new copy :) http://arinside.com/ Check out the beta, new features, and no current problems reported :) On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: ** I do not actually have that tool anymore - I used to have it during the 6.3 days :-) for some documentation work that I needed to do. Mark Brittain, who is currently working with the client I'm with on this engagement, made a mention of AR Utilities yesterday. I think he does have it so will ask him if he can. Meanwhile, I was thinking of enabling Object Relationships at some point later, as it has not yet been on development here. But since it's a one time high cost operation, have not got down to getting permission to get it done - mostly because I have not started with any real development work yet. I'm suspecting all of these fields with the exception of Company ID, are fields that were created either as a part of a copy paste operation and intended to be deleted later, but never were.. There is even a z1D Company Type field on there that is optional when it probably should have been a display only field. I won't swear it should have been a Display Only field though as I have not checked its underlying workflow as well.. Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:16 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company.. ** Does an ARInside of those fields show anything interesting? On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: ** There are some fields found in COM:Company, either found in the Miscellaneous tab, or hidden or both, or out of all views, that I would like to know if they served any real functional purpose in ITSM. Company ID - Field ID 26032 This is an indexed field so may probably be used in some of the searches in workflow. Is it used for anything other than a manual search for a company name by its ID? We do use it internally here for reporting and other things but wanted to know the application specific purpose of it if there is. Lead Time (Days) - Field ID 26013 Really??? Lead time for what? I could understand if it was a part of an asset - where you can have lead time for delivery or installation or both.. But for a company? I'm guessing its one of those fields that may have crept in as a part of a copy paste operation while creating fields for the COM:Company form and remained there as a ghost field and then got hidden. Or does it have a real purpose? And if so what is it? Navigation Menu04 - Field ID 104045 This field is out of all views. It looks like it was intended to be the 4th tier on the navigational menus for companies. Is this actually functional if populated? From the field ID it was probably not even created at the same time as the other 3 related fields, as those field ID's are sequential but this one is out of sequence.. Company Web ID - Field ID 101799 What is this supposed to contain? It's a hidden field, optional. Does it serve any kind of a purpose? Parent Company - Field ID 303604300 This field is out of all views. While it's fairly obvious what it can be used for, does it serve any functional purpose in ITSM at all? Or is it just one of those extra pieces of information that you could load if you want. It is probably not a part of any searches as it does not feature in any of the indexes built, and if it is, then that search may not be a very efficient search... Manufacturer Data Status - Field ID 42497 This is a hidden selection field having 6 values - New, Processed, Delete, Update, Invalid, Inact
Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
Well, there's no time like the present to download a new copy :) http://arinside.com/ Check out the beta, new features, and no current problems reported :) On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > ** > > I do not actually have that tool anymore – I used to have it during the > 6.3 days J for some documentation work that I needed to do. > > > > Mark Brittain, who is currently working with the client I’m with on this > engagement, made a mention of AR Utilities yesterday. I think he does have > it so will ask him if he can. > > > > Meanwhile, I was thinking of enabling Object Relationships at some point > later, as it has not yet been on development here. But since it’s a one > time high cost operation, have not got down to getting permission to get it > done – mostly because I have not started with any real development work yet. > > > > I’m suspecting all of these fields with the exception of Company ID, are > fields that were created either as a part of a copy paste operation and > intended to be deleted later, but never were.. There is even a *z1D > Company Type* field on there that is optional when it probably should > have been a display only field. I won’t swear it should have been a Display > Only field though as I have not checked its underlying workflow as well.. > > > > Joe > > > -- > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:16 PM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view > fields found in COM:Company.. > > > > ** > > Does an ARInside of those fields show anything interesting? > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > > ** > > There are some fields found in COM:Company, either found in the > Miscellaneous tab, or hidden or both, or out of all views, that I would > like to know if they served any real functional purpose in ITSM. > > > > *Company ID** – Field ID 26032* > > This is an indexed field so may probably be used in some of the searches > in workflow. Is it used for anything other than a manual search for a > company name by its ID? We do use it internally here for reporting and > other things but wanted to know the application specific purpose of it if > there is. > > > > *Lead Time (Days)** – Field ID 26013* > > Really??? Lead time for what? I could understand if it was a part of an > asset – where you can have lead time for delivery or installation or both.. > But for a company? I’m guessing its one of those fields that may have crept > in as a part of a copy paste operation while creating fields for the > COM:Company form and remained there as a ghost field and then got hidden. > Or does it have a real purpose? And if so what is it? > > > > *Navigation Menu04** – Field ID 104045* > > This field is out of all views. It looks like it was intended to be the 4 > th tier on the navigational menus for companies. Is this actually > functional if populated? From the field ID it was probably not even created > at the same time as the other 3 related fields, as those field ID’s are > sequential but this one is out of sequence.. > > > > *Company Web ID** – Field ID 101799* > > What is this supposed to contain? It’s a hidden field, optional. Does it > serve any kind of a purpose? > > > > *Parent Company** – Field ID 303604300* > > This field is out of all views. While it’s fairly obvious what it can be > used for, does it serve any functional purpose in ITSM at all? Or is it > just one of those extra pieces of information that you could load if you > want. It is probably not a part of any searches as it does not feature in > any of the indexes built, and if it is, then that search may not be a very > efficient search... > > > > *Manufacturer Data Status** – Field ID 42497* > > This is a hidden selection field having 6 values – New, Processed, Delete, > Update, Invalid, Inactive. This appears to be a field that might have been > mistakenly copied from the foundation load data forms?? > > > > *Manufacturer Creator** – Field ID 42498* > > Again a hidden field. Possibly copied on this form again by error from the > load form? > > > > *Manufacturer Source Dataset** – Field ID 42499* > > Hidden field again – maybe a part of the load form and should not have > been here? > > > > Are any of these fields apart from Company ID useful? Or do they serve no > purpose at all and should not have been there to begin with? > > > > Jo
Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
I do not actually have that tool anymore - I used to have it during the 6.3 days :-) for some documentation work that I needed to do. Mark Brittain, who is currently working with the client I'm with on this engagement, made a mention of AR Utilities yesterday. I think he does have it so will ask him if he can. Meanwhile, I was thinking of enabling Object Relationships at some point later, as it has not yet been on development here. But since it's a one time high cost operation, have not got down to getting permission to get it done - mostly because I have not started with any real development work yet. I'm suspecting all of these fields with the exception of Company ID, are fields that were created either as a part of a copy paste operation and intended to be deleted later, but never were.. There is even a z1D Company Type field on there that is optional when it probably should have been a display only field. I won't swear it should have been a Display Only field though as I have not checked its underlying workflow as well.. Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:16 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company.. ** Does an ARInside of those fields show anything interesting? On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: ** There are some fields found in COM:Company, either found in the Miscellaneous tab, or hidden or both, or out of all views, that I would like to know if they served any real functional purpose in ITSM. Company ID - Field ID 26032 This is an indexed field so may probably be used in some of the searches in workflow. Is it used for anything other than a manual search for a company name by its ID? We do use it internally here for reporting and other things but wanted to know the application specific purpose of it if there is. Lead Time (Days) - Field ID 26013 Really??? Lead time for what? I could understand if it was a part of an asset - where you can have lead time for delivery or installation or both.. But for a company? I'm guessing its one of those fields that may have crept in as a part of a copy paste operation while creating fields for the COM:Company form and remained there as a ghost field and then got hidden. Or does it have a real purpose? And if so what is it? Navigation Menu04 - Field ID 104045 This field is out of all views. It looks like it was intended to be the 4th tier on the navigational menus for companies. Is this actually functional if populated? From the field ID it was probably not even created at the same time as the other 3 related fields, as those field ID's are sequential but this one is out of sequence.. Company Web ID - Field ID 101799 What is this supposed to contain? It's a hidden field, optional. Does it serve any kind of a purpose? Parent Company - Field ID 303604300 This field is out of all views. While it's fairly obvious what it can be used for, does it serve any functional purpose in ITSM at all? Or is it just one of those extra pieces of information that you could load if you want. It is probably not a part of any searches as it does not feature in any of the indexes built, and if it is, then that search may not be a very efficient search... Manufacturer Data Status - Field ID 42497 This is a hidden selection field having 6 values - New, Processed, Delete, Update, Invalid, Inactive. This appears to be a field that might have been mistakenly copied from the foundation load data forms?? Manufacturer Creator - Field ID 42498 Again a hidden field. Possibly copied on this form again by error from the load form? Manufacturer Source Dataset - Field ID 42499 Hidden field again - maybe a part of the load form and should not have been here? Are any of these fields apart from Company ID useful? Or do they serve no purpose at all and should not have been there to begin with? Joe PS: By the way none of these feature in the data load form.. _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Information on some miscellaneous, hidden or out of view fields found in COM:Company..
Does an ARInside of those fields show anything interesting? On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Joe D'Souza wrote: > ** > > There are some fields found in COM:Company, either found in the > Miscellaneous tab, or hidden or both, or out of all views, that I would > like to know if they served any real functional purpose in ITSM. > > > > *Company ID** – Field ID 26032* > > This is an indexed field so may probably be used in some of the searches > in workflow. Is it used for anything other than a manual search for a > company name by its ID? We do use it internally here for reporting and > other things but wanted to know the application specific purpose of it if > there is. > > > > *Lead Time (Days)** – Field ID 26013* > > Really??? Lead time for what? I could understand if it was a part of an > asset – where you can have lead time for delivery or installation or both.. > But for a company? I’m guessing its one of those fields that may have crept > in as a part of a copy paste operation while creating fields for the > COM:Company form and remained there as a ghost field and then got hidden. > Or does it have a real purpose? And if so what is it? > > > > *Navigation Menu04** – Field ID 104045* > > This field is out of all views. It looks like it was intended to be the 4 > th tier on the navigational menus for companies. Is this actually > functional if populated? From the field ID it was probably not even created > at the same time as the other 3 related fields, as those field ID’s are > sequential but this one is out of sequence.. > > > > *Company Web ID** – Field ID 101799* > > What is this supposed to contain? It’s a hidden field, optional. Does it > serve any kind of a purpose? > > > > *Parent Company** – Field ID 303604300* > > This field is out of all views. While it’s fairly obvious what it can be > used for, does it serve any functional purpose in ITSM at all? Or is it > just one of those extra pieces of information that you could load if you > want. It is probably not a part of any searches as it does not feature in > any of the indexes built, and if it is, then that search may not be a very > efficient search... > > > > *Manufacturer Data Status** – Field ID 42497* > > This is a hidden selection field having 6 values – New, Processed, Delete, > Update, Invalid, Inactive. This appears to be a field that might have been > mistakenly copied from the foundation load data forms?? > > > > *Manufacturer Creator** – Field ID 42498* > > Again a hidden field. Possibly copied on this form again by error from the > load form? > > > > *Manufacturer Source Dataset** – Field ID 42499* > > Hidden field again – maybe a part of the load form and should not have > been here? > > > > Are any of these fields apart from Company ID useful? Or do they serve no > purpose at all and should not have been there to begin with? > > > > Joe > > > > PS: By the way none of these feature in the data load form.. > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
