Hi Sharan,
I was just wondering whether it would make sense to move the "Complete
Transaction fields" button closer to the field that it updates (i.e. the
"GlAccountId" field in the transaction entry screen)? Or, maybe rename it
to "Complete GlAccountId fields"?
Many thanks,
Chris
>
> Hi Chris
>
> I'm not sure what response you're looking for here. Is there some
> functionality that you are looking for that you want to check if it's
> linked
> to the 'Complete transactions fields'...?
>
> I'm sure that you could move and re-label this button to be somewhere else
> on the screen. I suppose it depends on how you want to use it.
>
> Thanks
> Sharan
>
>
> Chris Snow-3 wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sharan,
>>
>> What else does the "Complete Transaction Fields" button do? Perhaps a
>> button under the GlAccountType field labeled "Get 'Gl Account Id' for
>> Account Type" would be useful?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Sharan-F wrote:
>>> Hi Chris
>>>
>>> I agree with Carsten â I see this as a feature and not a bug. I'll
>>> tell
>>> you
>>> my reasoning.
>>>
>>> The GL account defaults are the way to setup which accounts
>>> (GLAccountIds)
>>> you want specific transaction types (GL Account Types) to map to. This
>>> also
>>> helps to automate where transactions are posted to and if setup
>>> correctly
>>> you should have minimal transactions falling into the error (ie Error
>>> Journal).
>>>
>>> For an accounting transaction, if you enter a GLAccountType and the
>>> GLAccountId is blank and then use the 'Complete transaction fields'
>>> instead
>>> of the 'Verify transaction' - you will see that the system will
>>> automatically pick up the mapping from GL account defaults if they
>>> exist
>>> and
>>> will fill the GLAccountId that corresponds to the GLAccountType.
>>>
>>> There will be situations where you may want to change the GLAccountType
>>> in
>>> an accounting transaction and by doing that, it will need to map to a
>>> different GLAccountId. So for example - if you dont know the account
>>> number
>>> (GL account Id) but you do know what type of transaction it is
>>> (GLAccountType) then the current system gives you the option to change
>>> it,
>>> update it, and then use the 'Complete transactions fields' to
>>> automatically
>>> bring in the correct GLAccount Id. (if the mapping has been setup!)
>>>
>>> If on the other hand your business is not concerned with knowing what
>>> type
>>> of transaction has been processed and just wants to focus on the
>>> GLAccountId
>>> itself then that is also an option... so in this case you can leave the
>>> GLAccountType blank and fill in the GLAccountId manually.
>>>
>>> So I think having both these fields available here adds to the
>>> flexibility
>>> of OFBiz.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Sharan
>>>
>>> Carsten Schinzer wrote:
>>>
>>>> This can only be considered a bug, if there is a mechanism to hook in
>>>> General Ledger configurations other than the default.
>>>>
>>>> Some more detail:
>>>> If you want to use a different GL setup, then there must be a
>>>> mechanism
>>>> to
>>>> configure default accounts for certain transactions that have
>>>> financial
>>>> implications, e.g. inventory additions/retrieval, sales etc.
>>>>
>>>> The above mechanism uses either a specific account or the account type
>>>> mapping.
>>>>
>>>> I personally find the account type mapping an easy way to do such a
>>>> default
>>>> mapping since it avoids to (re-)configure each and every transactional
>>>> service and instead focalize the configuration work to the accounting
>>>> application if the GL is changed.
>>>>
>>>> As most of my statements are based on assumptions and experience made
>>>> through config, it would be good if someone of the "experienced crowd"
>>>> could
>>>> verify these and add a comment here as well. However, in this context,
>>>> I
>>>> cannot agree that the above is a bug; IMHO it's rather a feature.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Carsten
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2009/9/25 Chris Snow <sno...@snowconsulting.co.uk>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I think this is a bug, but I wanted some feedback on it before I
>>>>> raised
>>>>> a
>>>>> JIRA issue...
>>>>>
>>>>> Any comments anyone?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris Snow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems that you must provide a glAccountTypeId, or a glAccountId
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> transaction entry. If neither are set when you verify a
>>>>>> transaction,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> following error message is given (on the demo system):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gl account id is not set for [00001] or mapping not found for
>>>>>> account
>>>>>> type"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you don't provide a glAccountId, and only provide a
>>>>>> glAccountTypeId,
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> there a mapping somewhere to map the two id's? It appears that
>>>>>> AcctgTransService.xml is not doing the mapping, it's only checking
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> glAccountId?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <if-empty field="acctgTransEntry.glAccountId">
>>>>>> <add-error><fail-message message="Gl account id is not
>>>>>> set
>>>>>> for [${acctgTransEntry.acctgTransEntrySeqId}] or mapping not found
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> account type ${acctgTransEntry.glAccountTypeId}"/></add-error>
>>>>>> </if-empty>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">Hi
>>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> usually the glAccountTypeId is passed to the service in order to
>>>>>>> retrieve
>>>>>>> the proper glAccountId (this is done with a series of lookup on GL
>>>>>>> mapping
>>>>>>> entities)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 21, 2009, at 7:28 AM, snowc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When adding a transaction entry, there are fields for
>>>>>>>> GlAccountType
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> GlAccountId.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why do we need to enter the GlAccountType when it can be obtained
>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> GlAccount?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Accounting-transaction-%3A-GlAccountType-tp25530186p25530186.html
>>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> </div>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Carsten Schinzer
>>>>
>>>> Waisenhausstr. 53a
>>>> 80637 München
>>>> Germany
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Accounting-transaction-%3A-GlAccountType-tp25530186p25639275.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
