Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Chris's thoughts on Preferred Stores and other topics

Expand Messages
  • vr8ce <vr8ce@yahoo.com>
    ... I suspect we re discussing semantics; I detailed in the sentences that follow the one you quoted what I was referring to. Call it functionality loss if
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In handyshopper@yahoogroups.com, "chrisant_wa <chrisant@p...>" <chrisant@p...> wrote:
      > --- "vr8ce <vr8ce@y...>" <vr8ce@y...> wrote:
      > > > Some people said basically "removing check marks from some
      > > > stores is loss of information because then we don't know
      > > > what stores the item is _available_ at versus where I'm
      > > > currently willing to purchase it". If you enable per-store
      > > > prices and enter an aisle or price for that store then
      > > > there isn't information loss.
      > >
      > > ... yes there is information loss. :) ... we do lose what
      > > stores that item is available in.
      >
      > How do you lose that information? I said if you enter an aisle or
      > price for that store then there isn't information loss. The reason
      > is because the fact that there is an aisle/price for that store
      > implies that the item is available at that store. The only way
      > that is not true is if you are entering aisle/price information for
      > stores where the item is not available. If that's the case, I
      > would be interested to know why.
      >
      > cheers,
      > // chris

      I suspect we're discussing semantics; I detailed in the sentences that follow the one you quoted what I was referring to. Call it functionality loss if you prefer. Regardless of what we call it, the program no longer functions the same way the next time you make a trip, without you going in and restoring all of those checkmarks. That's loss of ... whatever word you prefer. :)

      Vince
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.