Hi Frank,

> On 24 Jul 2019, at 17:47, Frank H. Ellenberger 
> <frank.h.ellenber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rosi,
>> Am 24.07.19 um 09:12 schrieb Rosi Dimova via gnucash-devel:
>> :
>> I never understood this decision to make translators part of dev-team.
> you are our ambassador to all Bulgarian speaking people. :-)
> Translators find many issues in the GUI: Missing context, bad plural
> forms, bad concatenation for right-to-left writing,  ...

I like that - an ambassador. Works for me. :-) 
You have a point, I never considered these things. But can recall being stuck 
at 33% of translation for months, because I didn’t understand one single word. 
If it wasn’t for Mila, who explained me our legislation lacks the concept of 
orphan account, Bulgarian translation wouldn’t become real for many years. At 
least, not from me.

> I like your idea. But considering our small resources, I believe it
> would better fit as a module into ERP software:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ERP_software_packages

Thank you!  :) I’m not good at explanations, but will give it another try and 
will stop disturbing your discussions. :) 
You and John are thinking big, but not small or not big enough. And you are 
underestimating yourselves. Or may be I wasn’t clear enough. Here it is why:

Technically, issuing ocean bill of lading is nothing much different that 
printing out a document on a letterhead. Forwarders and shipping lines use 
various tools. Small companies use spreadsheets or pdf templates to print it on 
paper. Big companies use SAP or other solutions. SAP-based solutions use 
browser+pdf again in the common case. I used to work on AS400 for almost 2 
years. Can you imagine that? It’s older than me! 

So, I’m talking about nothing more than two additional templates - one for 
originals and another for electronic (express or telex) release. But it is 
tricky, especially the latter. For originals: the margins of the templates 
should be adjustable to fit on their own forms. Also additional fields as per 
local legislation might be required (like SCAC code).
The good practice says originals should be printed out from fewer computers. 
Also two or max. three persons in charge shall sign them. A specimen of any 
written signature is kept to prove the validity of the B/L. But it is problem 
of the issuing party, not of the software. Most small companies do not follow 
this rule strictly.

For express release: same rules shall be kept by using electronic means. 
Basically it should include additionally three programmable fields:
- consecutive number of the document itself, not the B/L number 
- identity of the signing party (digital signature or some kind of security 
- valid time stamp, supported by Electronic data interchange (EDI) for vessel’s 
sailing date. 
Date of departure is as important as the identity. Especially for L/C.

The two templates are needed, because in some countries originals are the only 
valid B/L. Others require the B/L’s to mention the ocean rate (freighted B/L).

This is the idea and I think GNC can actually do that or supports the features 
to implement it. Please let me know if I’m right. :)

Kind regards,

gnucash-devel mailing list

Reply via email to