Delegating a standard SAP business object child to its parent

[Zmudzin,Tomasz,VEVEY,GL-IS/IT]

Now the difference is in how the theory is constructed -- or applied :-)
 
Normally subtypes correspond to specializations of a business object. This
makes the delegation legitimate -- you can always treat your specialized
object as the general one. The reverse makes little sense from the modelling
perspective -- you cannot safely assume that whenever you use the general
object it will handle the more specific case properly.
 
Example:
Tools --> screwdriver
You can store all tools, including a screwdriver. Not every tool can be used
to drive a screw.
 
Now this is enforced only to a limited degree in SWO1, but depending on the
fact that some checks are missing may backfire in the future.
 
Kind regards,
Tomasz
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Kjetil Kilhavn [mailto:kjetilk at statoil.com]
Sent: Wednesday,14. May 2003 06:57
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Delegating a standard SAP business object child to its
parent
 
 
I can think of one reason. If SAP has created a subobjecttype instead of
simply enhancing BUS2038 they probably had a (good) reason....
Our version 4.6C system doesn't contain the subtype. If there is no change
in the inherited parts (no redefinitions) then in theory the delegation
shouldn't make any difference.
 
But as someone pointed out here recently (and this wise saying has been
borrowed many times since then): The difference between theory and
practice? In theory there is no difference.
--
Kjetil Kilhavn
 
 
 
 
|--------+-------------------------------->
|        |          "Dywan, Abby"         |
|        |          <adywan at clarkstonconsu|
|        |          lting.com>            |
|        |          Sent by: SAP Workflow |
|        |          <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.|
|        |          MIT.EDU>              |
|        |                                |
|        |                                |
|        |          13.05.2003 23:47      |
|        |          Please respond to "SAP|
|        |          Workflow Users' Group"|
|        |                                |
|--------+-------------------------------->
 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------|
  |
|
  |       To:     SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
|
  |       cc:     (bcc: Kjetil Kilhavn)
|
  |       Subject:     Delegating a standard SAP business object child to
its parent                          |
 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------|
 
 
 
 
Hi fellow workflow users -
 
I am looking to complete the a service notification attached to a service
order business object.  The service order business object has the service
notification as an attribute.  However, the business object that serves as
an attribute (bus2038) doesn't contain the method to complete the service
notification.  However, a child of the business object (BUS2038a) does
contain this logic.  I'd really like to be able to use this business object
/ method instead of having to code my own.
 
Does anybody know of any reason why I couldn't delegate the standard SAP
business object child to its parent in order to take advantage of this
functionality within the service order?  I've never tried it before and I
thought I should see if anyone had any serious warnings first...
 
Any advice would be appreciated - thanks!
Abby   :)
 
Abby Dywan
 
Clarkston Consulting
adywan at clarkstonconsulting.com
cell:  (404) 808-3974
 
 
 
 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete
this message.
Thank you.