Sunder Anand wrote: > > Data model resource book version-1 precisely describes this situation in > the chapter 'products#products and parts' > > In my opinion, You may be better off referencing the book and ofbiz data > (entity) schema in parallel since you are sure about your needs. >
Sunder, I managed to find this section using the Amazon "search inside this book" feature. It addresses my knowledge gap with regard to subassemblies very well. I now understand that subassemblies are supposed to represent raw materials that have been processed in house with some work effort but are not directly for sale. Thanks for citation. I'm still unclear as to how to decide what elements of my products that are determined by buyer preference should be implemented as OFBiz Features and which should implemented as OFBiz Configurations. Again, the context of this is a highly configurable custom instrument (dozens of dimensions of customizability), and I'm hoping to get OFBiz to help me build a system for letting users submit requests for quotes. It seems like I should not set out to develop thousands of concrete product variants, each implementing a set of standard features selected by the users' choices. Should I completely avoid any use of Features because of the number of dimensions of customizability, and instead use only Configurations? If I should use a mix, how should I decide what to make a Feature and what to make a Configuration? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/In-Search-Of%3A-Theory-of-product-catalog-composition-tf4946653.html#a14199745 Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
