Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
Locked
Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
 
|
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 |
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
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. > |
Re: Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
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> > |
Re: Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacopo Cappellato-4
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 ${acctgTransEntry.glAccountTypeId}"/></add-error> </if-empty> Many thanks in advance, Chris Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">Hi Chris, > > usually the glAccountTypeId is passed to the service in order to > retrieve the proper glAccountId (this is done with a series of lookup > on GL mapping entities) > > Regards, > > Jacopo > > On Sep 21, 2009, at 7:28 AM, snowc wrote: > >> >> When adding a transaction entry, there are fields for GlAccountType and >> GlAccountId. >> >> Why do we need to enter the GlAccountType when it can be obtained >> from the >> GlAccount? >> >> Many thanks in advance, >> >> Chris >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Accounting-transaction-%3A-GlAccountType-tp25530186p25530186.html >> >> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > > </div> > |
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
I think this is a bug, but I wanted some feedback on it before I raised
a JIRA issue... Any comments anyone? Chris Snow wrote: > Hi Jacopo, > > It seems that you must provide a glAccountTypeId, or a glAccountId for > a transaction entry. If neither are set when you verify a > transaction, the following error message is given (on the demo system): > > "Gl account id is not set for [00001] or mapping not found for account > type" > > If you don't provide a glAccountId, and only provide a > glAccountTypeId, is there a mapping somewhere to map the two id's? It > appears that AcctgTransService.xml is not doing the mapping, it's only > checking for glAccountId? > > <if-empty field="acctgTransEntry.glAccountId"> > <add-error><fail-message message="Gl account id is not > set for [${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> >> > |
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
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 <[hidden email]> > 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 |
|
|
Hi Chris
I agree with Carsten – 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
|
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
Aha! Now I understand what the "Complete Transaction" button does! I
thought the posting process did the mapping automatically. Thanks for clearing up my misconceptions. I also made another blunder, I meant to post the "is this a bug?" message in response to my message titled: "accounting transaction entry reconciliation status" Many thanks everyone! Sharan-F wrote: > Hi Chris > > I agree with Carsten – 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 <[hidden email]> >> >> >>> 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 >> >> >> > > |
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Sharan-F
Thanks Sharan,
Put your answer in wiki. It's really nice to have such clear explanations. Jacques From: "Sharan-F" <[hidden email]> > Hi Chris > > I agree with Carsten – 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 <[hidden email]> >> >>> 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-tp25530186p25620221.html > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > |
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
In reply to this post by Sharan-F
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 – 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 <[hidden email]> >> >> >>> 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 >> >> >> > > |
|
|
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
|
Re: Accounting transaction : GlAccountType
|
|
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 <[hidden email]> >>>> >>>> >>>>> 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. > > |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |