|
Prime Price
Registered User
Join date: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 26
|
03-03-2008 23:24
Hi, I as wondering a thing about the transactions history details. Say I got both objects, some referred as payment (type  , which the name of the object paying as Desc: (for description), some just referred as "object pays" (type without description...a real pain for accounting since you dont get any details for transactions categorized as "object pays". Since both are objects and both pay...why wouldnt it be categorized as payment with the object name? Cheers, Prime |
|
Larrie Lane
Registered User
Join date: 9 Feb 2007
Posts: 667
|
03-04-2008 01:11
From: Prime Price Hi, I as wondering a thing about the transactions history details. Say I got both objects, some referred as payment (type , which the name of the object paying as Desc: (for description), some just referred as "object pays" (type without description...a real pain for accounting since you dont get any details for transactions categorized as "object pays". Since both are objects and both pay...why wouldnt it be categorized as payment with the object name? Cheers, Prime Automatically all prims when rezzed are called object, if you do not change this name in the Edit menu under General tab then if you set it to pay or to sale then it will just be called object. Change the name. |
|
Damanios Thetan
looking in
Join date: 6 Mar 2004
Posts: 992
|
03-04-2008 02:27
I have no idea, but usually it has to do with internal SL mechanics. In this case, the transaction mechanism probably doesn't contain the name of the source of a transaction, just they type and item(s) transferred.
This means that any item giving money (or any vendor, as the opposite happens here, only source, no info on transferred item) needs to keep their own logs. The creator has to script in this option. And combining them with the SL transactions log is a hassle.
It's one of the reasons people switch to networked vendor systems.
BTW, despite what the previous poster suggested, changing the name of a paying object won't make any difference.
|
|
Larrie Lane
Registered User
Join date: 9 Feb 2007
Posts: 667
|
03-04-2008 03:31
From: Damanios Thetan BTW, despite what the previous poster suggested, changing the name of a paying object won't make any difference. But adding the name to the description field will enable the item to show up in Transaction history. Although the 'Type' still remains as 'Object Sale' and will not change. |
|
Damanios Thetan
looking in
Join date: 6 Mar 2004
Posts: 992
|
03-04-2008 03:34
From: Larrie Lane But adding the name to the description field will enable the item to show up in Transaction history. Although the 'Type' still remains as 'Object Sale' and will not change. True, for sold objects. The situation differs depending on transaction type: 1. Object sold. Description contains object name 2. Object pays an avatar. No further info about the paying object. 3. Avatar pays object. Description contains name of the receiving object. (Usually the situation with vendors, items given from objects to avies aren't logged in transaction history). 4. Item is given from account holder to avi. No further info about which item. 5-x. Uploads, withdrawals, group liabilities etc. I addressed situation 2 which the OP asked about and 3. All in all, it's kind of a hit or miss which info is provided. |
