Ya perhaps ... but it just doesn't feel right. The more thought I gave it the more I started to like the agreement approach. On my drive home I asked myself if I could come up with an example of something that represents a relationship between two parties AND would have some sort of identify fields. In the end I could not come up with anything ... I think all of our examples are reasonably modeled as agreements and one could argue that the Employment entity in Ofbiz really should be an agreement as well. DMR book Vol1 suggests it as a sub-class of Agreement in fig 4.13.
If PartyRelation is really just hooking up parties for (mostly) navigational purposes; then anything more than that seems to usually represent some sort of Agreement between the two parties. In this way it seems Agreement is just a specialization of PartyRelationship. I will do more research and come up with a more concrete proposal for review (if any changes are required at all). Adrian Crum wrote: > > We already have PartyIdentification and PartyIdentificationType. Maybe > those could be tied to PartyRelationship somehow. > -- View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Storing-supplier-provided-account-number-tp2076162p2076460.html Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
