Discussion Forum: Thread 239196 |
|
|
| | Author: | Bonacieux | Posted: | Jul 25, 2018 07:40 | Subject: | Why 3068bpb2000? | Viewed: | 103 times | Topic: | Catalog | Status: | Open | |
|
| The patterned parts will normally numbred with Part Nr. than pb (or bpb) and
than following numbers.
The last was 3068bpb1160, the next will be 3068bpb1161.
But the next is 3068bpb2000, why?
The same at the Panel 60581pb102, here come's 60581pb200 not the next logical
number 60581pb103.
Yesterday come's the 60581pb201.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | Author: | StormChaser | Posted: | Jul 25, 2018 13:37 | Subject: | Re: Why 3068bpb2000? | Viewed: | 38 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Inventories, Bonacieux writes:
| The patterned parts will normally numbred with Part Nr. than pb (or bpb) and
than following numbers.
The last was 3068bpb1160, the next will be 3068bpb1161.
But the next is 3068bpb2000, why?
The same at the Panel 60581pb102, here come's 60581pb200 not the next logical
number 60581pb103.
Yesterday come's the 60581pb201.
|
It was simply an error on the parts of the submitter and whomever approved the
catalog submissions. I have submitted requests for all three parts to change
them to the correct numbers.
Thank you for noticing and reporting this.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | Author: | samsam2 | Posted: | Jul 25, 2018 20:28 | Subject: | Re: Why 3068bpb2000? | Viewed: | 42 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| It was me. I thought I had seen somewhere, that if one didn't know the next
sequence number, to just pick a higher one and then a Catmin could fix it. Now
in retrospect, I suppose I should have added a note to point out this still needed
to be set correctly?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Author: | maggiec | Posted: | Jul 25, 2018 21:39 | Subject: | Re: Why 3068bpb2000? | Viewed: | 31 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, samsam2 writes:
| It was me. I thought I had seen somewhere, that if one didn't know the next
sequence number, to just pick a higher one and then a Catmin could fix it. Now
in retrospect, I suppose I should have added a note to point out this still needed
to be set correctly?
|
Yes. We normally check but sometimes we forget.
|
|
|
|
|
|