Uploaded image for project: 'OFBiz'
  1. OFBiz
  2. OFBIZ-7725

Document the routing number fields in entities

    Details

    • Type: Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Trivial
    • Resolution: Done
    • Affects Version/s: 16.11.01
    • Fix Version/s: 16.11.01
    • Component/s: accounting
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Let's extend EftAccount by adding 'BranchCode' that could indicate the branch code of the Bank through which Eft Account is linked, It could be allowed to optionally set for any existing and new EftAccount in Ofbiz system.

      Let's ask for 'Branch Code' with other details while Eft Account is being added/edited from UI (e..g Party >> Profile etc.).

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

          I doubt whether we need an additional field for this. This is a value that can already be stored in the EFT account. For countries having joined the SEPA, bank codes can be derived from the bank account number. And other variants (SWIFT/BIC Codes) are covered as well.

          Show
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - I doubt whether we need an additional field for this. This is a value that can already be stored in the EFT account. For countries having joined the SEPA, bank codes can be derived from the bank account number. And other variants (SWIFT/BIC Codes) are covered as well.
          Hide
          swash78 Swapnil Shah added a comment -

          I am not sure but i don't think many countries have fully adopted to the practice of having branch code(swift code) embedded in bank account number for both domestic and international fund transfer. If its only true for limited set of countries e.g. within SEPA, then we can try to keep it separate as well from Bank account number to keep the feature more generic.

          Show
          swash78 Swapnil Shah added a comment - I am not sure but i don't think many countries have fully adopted to the practice of having branch code(swift code) embedded in bank account number for both domestic and international fund transfer. If its only true for limited set of countries e.g. within SEPA, then we can try to keep it separate as well from Bank account number to keep the feature more generic.
          Hide
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - - edited

          Like I said, we already have a field in the entity to capture the bank code/branch code/swift code/bic code/etc. code.

          Show
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - - edited Like I said, we already have a field in the entity to capture the bank code/branch code/swift code/bic code/etc. code.
          Hide
          swash78 Swapnil Shah added a comment - - edited

          Sorry i couldn't trace any dedicated field to set 'branchCode' in EFT_ACCOUNT (https://ofbiz-vm.apache.org:8443/webtools/control/FindGeneric?entityName=EftAccount). Are we referring it from any other entity?

          Show
          swash78 Swapnil Shah added a comment - - edited Sorry i couldn't trace any dedicated field to set 'branchCode' in EFT_ACCOUNT ( https://ofbiz-vm.apache.org:8443/webtools/control/FindGeneric?entityName=EftAccount ). Are we referring it from any other entity?
          Hide
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

          That is probably because the original implementers of the EFT Account entity definition didn't look beyond the obvious. It is following field:

          <field name="routingNumber" type="short-varchar"></field>
          
          Show
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - That is probably because the original implementers of the EFT Account entity definition didn't look beyond the obvious. It is following field: <field name= "routingNumber" type= " short -varchar" ></field>
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Hi Pierre, adding fields, like those suggested by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code, in both Eft and Check entities, comes at no costs if we take the burden to explain (local descriptions) what they are, with a common link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code for users to clarify futher.

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Hi Pierre, adding fields, like those suggested by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code , in both Eft and Check entities, comes at no costs if we take the burden to explain (local descriptions) what they are, with a common link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code for users to clarify futher.
          Hide
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

          Maybe it doesn't come with a cost for the developer adding it to the entity definition. But it comes with a cost when migration (from an older release version to a newer) comes around.

          Show
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - Maybe it doesn't come with a cost for the developer adding it to the entity definition. But it comes with a cost when migration (from an older release version to a newer) comes around.
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          OK, then we should at least document it in both entities, a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code with some more explanations on how to do it in OFBiz (attributes?) seems the bare minimum

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - OK, then we should at least document it in both entities, a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code with some more explanations on how to do it in OFBiz (attributes?) seems the bare minimum
          Hide
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment -

          Can we close this issue? Or at least revise down the priority?

          "Routing number" is the US terminology for the same idea. If that isn't meaningful for people in other locales, I suggest that the UI labels could be changed to a better description for that locale. In Australia, that would be BSB (Bank-State-Branch) .

          Jacques, wouldn't this be better documented in the Business Setup Guide and the online help, rather than in the definition of the entity?

          Show
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment - Can we close this issue? Or at least revise down the priority? "Routing number" is the US terminology for the same idea. If that isn't meaningful for people in other locales, I suggest that the UI labels could be changed to a better description for that locale. In Australia, that would be BSB (Bank-State-Branch) . Jacques, wouldn't this be better documented in the Business Setup Guide and the online help, rather than in the definition of the entity?
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Hi Paul, why not both? Seasoned developers tend to directly look into source files and more rarely wiki Setup Guides. It does not seem that these will change in future so no maintenance issues are expected.

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Hi Paul, why not both? Seasoned developers tend to directly look into source files and more rarely wiki Setup Guides. It does not seem that these will change in future so no maintenance issues are expected.
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Thanks Swapnil, Pierre and Paul for the helpful discussion

          At revision: 1770345, I have added a description for the rountingNumber field (also in PayrollPreference in humares) with a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code where this field is explained for many countries.

          As suggested by Paul Foxworthy I added the Bank-State-Branch label for
          Australia. You might want to check the translation for you country or add it

          Finally I removed the FormFieldTitle_routingNumber in in humanres, it's not used anywhere and at least the French translation was wrong. Better to stick to AccountingRoutingNumber label

          Paul I looked into https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/Apache+OFBiz+Business+Setup+Guide but did not find an easy place where to put this information, please feel free to do so. Same for the online help, I did not find a clear location among applications/accounting/data/helpdata files.

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Thanks Swapnil, Pierre and Paul for the helpful discussion At revision: 1770345, I have added a description for the rountingNumber field (also in PayrollPreference in humares) with a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_code where this field is explained for many countries. As suggested by Paul Foxworthy I added the Bank-State-Branch label for Australia. You might want to check the translation for you country or add it Finally I removed the FormFieldTitle_routingNumber in in humanres, it's not used anywhere and at least the French translation was wrong. Better to stick to AccountingRoutingNumber label Paul I looked into https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/Apache+OFBiz+Business+Setup+Guide but did not find an easy place where to put this information, please feel free to do so. Same for the online help, I did not find a clear location among applications/accounting/data/helpdata files.
          Hide
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment -

          Thanks Jacques,

          What you've done in the descriptions is fine by me. It was "explanations" I didn't like. Knowledge of how to use the routingNumber is as important (maybe more so) for business analysts and owners as well as developers.

          There is an internationalisation issue with descriptions too. It should be possible to see descriptions in the Web Tools in languages other than English.

          Cheers

          Paul

          Show
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment - Thanks Jacques, What you've done in the descriptions is fine by me. It was "explanations" I didn't like. Knowledge of how to use the routingNumber is as important (maybe more so) for business analysts and owners as well as developers. There is an internationalisation issue with descriptions too. It should be possible to see descriptions in the Web Tools in languages other than English. Cheers Paul
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Pierre, I already intentionally changed the title because this does not concern only the EftAccount. Not sure why you put it back, but please not again

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Pierre, I already intentionally changed the title because this does not concern only the EftAccount. Not sure why you put it back, but please not again
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Hi Paul,

          You said

          It was "explanations" I didn't like

          Are you referring to something existing or do you mean it miss?

          It should be possible to see descriptions in the Web Tools in languages other than English.

          Sounds like quite à good idea to me, could you please open a new Jira for that?

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Hi Paul, You said It was "explanations" I didn't like Are you referring to something existing or do you mean it miss? It should be possible to see descriptions in the Web Tools in languages other than English. Sounds like quite à good idea to me, could you please open a new Jira for that?
          Hide
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

          So you're making the title encompassing more than the description tells us?

          Is that based on the dilution in the comments provided? e.g. PayrollPreference?

          Show
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - So you're making the title encompassing more than the description tells us? Is that based on the dilution in the comments provided? e.g. PayrollPreference?
          Hide
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment -

          I was talking about your suggestion that "explanations on how to do it in OFBiz" should be in the XML definition of the entity. I still think that's not the right place for procedural documentation .

          Show
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment - I was talking about your suggestion that "explanations on how to do it in OFBiz" should be in the XML definition of the entity. I still think that's not the right place for procedural documentation .
          Hide
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment -

          OK, created OFBIZ-9127

          Show
          paul_foxworthy Paul Foxworthy added a comment - OK, created OFBIZ-9127
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          I must say I had not enough time (and will) to modify the description. I guess interested people can understand enough reading the title and the comments. If you think otherwise please feel free to update the description.

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - I must say I had not enough time (and will) to modify the description. I guess interested people can understand enough reading the title and the comments. If you think otherwise please feel free to update the description.
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Really interested persons should read the commit log which explains it better BTW.

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Really interested persons should read the commit log which explains it better BTW.
          Hide
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

          What has been committed in relation to this issue? That would help understand what you're trying to convey.

          Show
          pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - What has been committed in relation to this issue? That would help understand what you're trying to convey.
          Hide
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

          Look for "At revision: 1770345" in this issue

          Show
          jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Look for "At revision: 1770345" in this issue

            People

            • Assignee:
              jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux
              Reporter:
              swash78 Swapnil Shah
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Development