Let's say I have to purchase a raw material (rope) from a supplier; the
ordered quantity is expressed in centimeters and the minimum order quantity (and order quantity increments) is 10000; the price for 10000 is 1$ and so the unit purchase price is 0.0001$. This is the summary: minimumOrderQuantity=10000 orderQtyIncrements=10000 quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) lastPrice=0.0001$ I could not enter this price in the SupplierProduct.lastPrice field because the decimals allowed there are 2. One solution I think is the following one: minimumOrderQuantity=1 orderQtyIncrements=1 unitsIncluded=10000 (is it ok to use this field or should I add a new one for this purpose?) quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) lastPrice=1$ Does this make sense? Jacopo PS: I've noticed that the SupplierProduct.lastPrice is of type currency-amount; shouldn't it be of type currency-precise like the ProductPrice.price field? |
It might be nice to use a pattern here that is similar to the one used on the Product entity, ie the combination of the quantityIncluded, quantityUomId, and piecesIncluded fields. These are pretty flexible, and it would be consistent with existing things. -David On Sep 5, 2006, at 3:41 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > Let's say I have to purchase a raw material (rope) from a supplier; > the ordered quantity is expressed in centimeters and the minimum > order quantity (and order quantity increments) is 10000; the price > for 10000 is 1$ and so the unit purchase price is 0.0001$. > This is the summary: > minimumOrderQuantity=10000 > orderQtyIncrements=10000 > quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) > lastPrice=0.0001$ > > I could not enter this price in the SupplierProduct.lastPrice field > because the decimals allowed there are 2. > > One solution I think is the following one: > minimumOrderQuantity=1 > orderQtyIncrements=1 > unitsIncluded=10000 (is it ok to use this field or should I add a > new one for this purpose?) > quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) > lastPrice=1$ > > Does this make sense? > > Jacopo > > PS: I've noticed that the SupplierProduct.lastPrice is of type > currency-amount; shouldn't it be of type currency-precise like the > ProductPrice.price field? |
Ok, something like this (continuing with my example)?
quantityIncluded = 10000 (new field) quantityUomId = LEN_cm (centimeters) lastPrice = 1$ unitsIncluded = 1 Is it correct? Jacopo David E Jones wrote: > > It might be nice to use a pattern here that is similar to the one used > on the Product entity, ie the combination of the quantityIncluded, > quantityUomId, and piecesIncluded fields. These are pretty flexible, and > it would be consistent with existing things. > > -David > > > On Sep 5, 2006, at 3:41 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > >> Let's say I have to purchase a raw material (rope) from a supplier; >> the ordered quantity is expressed in centimeters and the minimum order >> quantity (and order quantity increments) is 10000; the price for 10000 >> is 1$ and so the unit purchase price is 0.0001$. >> This is the summary: >> minimumOrderQuantity=10000 >> orderQtyIncrements=10000 >> quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) >> lastPrice=0.0001$ >> >> I could not enter this price in the SupplierProduct.lastPrice field >> because the decimals allowed there are 2. >> >> One solution I think is the following one: >> minimumOrderQuantity=1 >> orderQtyIncrements=1 >> unitsIncluded=10000 (is it ok to use this field or should I add a new >> one for this purpose?) >> quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) >> lastPrice=1$ >> >> Does this make sense? >> >> Jacopo >> >> PS: I've noticed that the SupplierProduct.lastPrice is of type >> currency-amount; shouldn't it be of type currency-precise like the >> ProductPrice.price field? |
It looks like there is already a unitsIncluded field on the entity that is a floating-point, just as the quantityIncluded should be. So, what we should probably do is add a piecesIncluded field that is a numeric. I guess it would be something like: > piecesIncluded = 1 (new field) > quantityUomId = LEN_cm (centimeters) > lastPrice = 1$ > unitsIncluded = 10000 -David On Sep 5, 2006, at 10:56 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > Ok, something like this (continuing with my example)? > > quantityIncluded = 10000 (new field) > quantityUomId = LEN_cm (centimeters) > lastPrice = 1$ > unitsIncluded = 1 > > Is it correct? > > Jacopo > > David E Jones wrote: >> It might be nice to use a pattern here that is similar to the one >> used on the Product entity, ie the combination of the >> quantityIncluded, quantityUomId, and piecesIncluded fields. These >> are pretty flexible, and it would be consistent with existing things. >> -David >> On Sep 5, 2006, at 3:41 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>> Let's say I have to purchase a raw material (rope) from a >>> supplier; the ordered quantity is expressed in centimeters and >>> the minimum order quantity (and order quantity increments) is >>> 10000; the price for 10000 is 1$ and so the unit purchase price >>> is 0.0001$. >>> This is the summary: >>> minimumOrderQuantity=10000 >>> orderQtyIncrements=10000 >>> quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) >>> lastPrice=0.0001$ >>> >>> I could not enter this price in the SupplierProduct.lastPrice >>> field because the decimals allowed there are 2. >>> >>> One solution I think is the following one: >>> minimumOrderQuantity=1 >>> orderQtyIncrements=1 >>> unitsIncluded=10000 (is it ok to use this field or should I add a >>> new one for this purpose?) >>> quantityUomId=LEN_cm (centimeters) >>> lastPrice=1$ >>> >>> Does this make sense? >>> >>> Jacopo >>> >>> PS: I've noticed that the SupplierProduct.lastPrice is of type >>> currency-amount; shouldn't it be of type currency-precise like >>> the ProductPrice.price field? > |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |