Thanks Michael and Rishi for your feedback. If we follow the proper convention with TypeId and entity name then there is no issue. But the case is that there is some inconsistency in existing entities. We will have to fix some of the existing entities as per convention.
-- Thanks & Regards --- Arun Patidar Manager, Enterprise Software Development HotWax Systems Pvt Ltd. www.hotwaxsystems.com On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Rishi Solanki <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Michael, > > I'm also in favor of using id and description fields suggest the entity > name. Existing model is capable to to resolve the reported issue if we > follow the conventions. > > Rishi Solanki > Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development > HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd. > Direct: +91-9893287847 > http://www.hotwaxsystems.com > www.hotwax.co > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Michael Brohl <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > -1 from my side, I think we can solve this by convention instead of > > introducing a new field. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Michael > > > > > > Am 01.09.17 um 15:53 schrieb Vaibhav Jain: > > > > +1 for introducing new attribute "tableName". > >> > >> > >> > >> Vaibhav Jain > >> Hotwax Systems, > >> [email protected] > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Rishi Solanki <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> I'm not sure this one is best practice or not, but it should be follow. > We > >>> should try to name the type same as entity name. > >>> Other examples; > >>> - PartyTpe >> PERSON and PARTY_GROUP > >>> - PaymentMethodType >> CREDIT_CARD, FIN_ACCOUNT, EFT_ACCOUNT, GIFT_CARD > >>> etc. > >>> > >>> IMO, best practice is to have the hasTable attribute in the entity. > Also > >>> if > >>> its entity exists then value must be Y. > >>> > >>> I see ShipmentGatewayConfigType and PaymentGatewayConfigType not > setting > >>> value to Y for the types system having the entities. Also > >>> PaymentMethodType > >>> does not have the hasTable attribute. > >>> > >>> So I think we should fix both these and no need to have the extra > field. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Rishi Solanki > >>> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development > >>> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd. > >>> Direct: +91-9893287847 > >>> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com > >>> www.hotwax.co > >>> > >>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Arun Patidar > <arun.patidar@hotwaxsystems. > >>> com > >>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> Hello All, > >>>> > >>>> 'hasTable' field of 'Type' entities is used to give an idea that > detail > >>>> entity exists or not. We generally get the name of detail entity on > the > >>>> basis of typeId field value. > >>>> > >>>> For example : > >>>> > >>>> ContactMechType,contactMechTypeId = "POSTAL_ADDRESS" then we go to > >>>> PostalAddress for detail. > >>>> > >>>> similarly, > >>>> ContactMechType,contactMechTypeId = "TELECOM_NUMBER" then we go to > >>>> TelecomNumber for detail. > >>>> > >>>> is it a best practice to identify the name of detail entity on the > basis > >>>> > >>> of > >>> > >>>> typeId value? > >>>> > >>>> If yes, then there are some entities that are not following the > pattern. > >>>> Some of them are: > >>>> - ShipmentGatewayConfigType > >>>> - PaymentGatewayConfigType > >>>> > >>>> if not, then we can add a field in Type entities to mention the name > of > >>>> detail entity. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Please let me know your thoughts. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Thanks & Regards > >>>> --- > >>>> Arun Patidar > >>>> Manager, Enterprise Software Development > >>>> > >>>> HotWax Systems Pvt Ltd. > >>>> > >>>> www.hotwaxsystems.com > >>>> > >>>> > > > > >
