I would suggest a unique ID of 00001 increment by one
Calculated field that would concatenate the DT - with with unique ID or LT - with the unique ID.
If I could only have 1 unique database Id that would work perfectly, but I want unique ID's for each Category. It makes it easier to separate assets if we are doing an inventory search plus there area lot of other fields that come into play that requires this.
I at first was trying to do this under "specifying calculations" but I could work more towards validations:\
If ( Det 7 Asset Inventory::Category = "Desktop"; SerialIncrement ( "DT-00000" ; 1))
or If ( Det 7 Asset Inventory::Category = "Laptop"; SerialIncrement ( "LP-00000" ; 1))
I found out the or command doesn't work here...yep...just trying to figure out the commands.
That makes it makes it momentously easier I know...but it's just a requirement I have with a customer. If you believe we should stick to a universal unique ID, then I will do that.
Ask the customer the same questions as in the other thread:
What should happen if a record is deleted? And what if a record is reasigned to another category?
And, most importantly: who cares? Would your customer prefer an unreliable numbering system to one where the numbers are not consecutive within a category (and they are not going to be consecutive anyway, because if a record is deleted or reassigned...).
Note that it IS possible to calculate the ordinal number of an item within its group. But then if an item is deleted/reassigned, the gap will close and some items will be renumbered - so you cannot use this as a permanent reference.
Got it. Thanks for the help and guidance.