You're not understanding the design. The EntitySubtype entity implements
entity subtypes only, it does not replace all *Type entities. There are
*Type entities in the DMRB that are not related to entity subtypes - so
those will remain unchanged.
The ProductType entity implements Product subtyp
Well, no I didn't.
If I understand your design, you are proposing to keep the ProductType entity
and add a generic EntitySubtype entity for *subtypes*; the pattern described in
the EntitySubtype is similar to the one proposed by David for the *Type
entities.
Keeping the existing pattern for Typ
Because I see the same potential for misuse if the subtypes were
implemented in Enumeration.
I will add implementation information to the description of the subtype
entities.
-Adrian
On 10/6/2012 8:42 PM, David E Jones wrote:
If any single entity were to be used for types instead of one per
From: "David E Jones"
If any single entity were to be used for types instead of one per type, why not
Enumeration? And yes, that is what I did with the
Mantle data model.
When I first played with OFBiz that's what I wondered about, why not all in
Enumeration? Maybe simplistic, there are alwa
If any single entity were to be used for types instead of one per type, why not
Enumeration? And yes, that is what I did with the Mantle data model.
Still, I agree with Jacopo... It is not worth the change repercussions for
OFBiz. What you described is a problem with lack of research and/or exp
So your opinion has changed...
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ofbiz-dev/201103.mbox/%3c82330f5c-3938-487e-98ae-ffee0c876...@hotwaxmedia.com%3E
-Adrian
On 10/5/2012 10:23 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
HelloAdrian,
in my opinion it would be better to leave the data model as is, but im
HelloAdrian,
in my opinion it would be better to leave the data model as is, but improve the
descriptions of the types (and documentation, in the form of comments to xml
data) and also enhnce our utils to deal with types (the Product already has
something in place).
Regards,
Jacopo
On Oct 1,
On 10/2/2012 1:13 AM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 1/10/2012, at 7:14 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
I mentioned this once before as part of another discussion, but I'm creating a
new discussion so it can receive the attention it deserves.
The Data Model Resource Book describes entity subtypes. OFBiz implem
On 1/10/2012, at 7:14 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> I mentioned this once before as part of another discussion, but I'm creating
> a new discussion so it can receive the attention it deserves.
>
> The Data Model Resource Book describes entity subtypes. OFBiz implements
> entity subtypes by adding a
The user will not see the EntitySubtype entity because it will not be a
part of the UI. In other words, a user can't add new subtypes. There can
be a UI in Web Tools for adding entity subtypes, but like I said, it
will clearly describe the pattern and the correct usage.
-Adrian
On 10/1/2012 1
For the user (or developers) who not understand that pattern, I think it
will not more clear.
But, on a Data Model perspective I prefer only one entity than multiple.
With one entity, it will be possible to have only one entity for
EntitySubTypeAttr and EntityAttr and so having a generic User in
For the user (or developers) who not understand that pattern, I think it
will not more clear.
But, on a Data Model perspective I prefer only one entity than multiple.
With one entity, it will be possible to have only one entity for
EntitySubTypeAttr and EntityAttr and so having a generic User in
12 matches
Mail list logo
