From: iced l. <ice...@gm...> - 2013-12-05 04:45:46
|
Hi Exson, Thank you for your interesting post. Personally I have always found it a little more time consuming to set up access using roles, but well worth it when it comes to maintenance of user access. Even in businesses with smaller numbers of people I find it a chore to remember who has what access when applied at a user level (depending on the application), and if some leaves the business or new people come in, then we have to remember again what all the setups are or have them documented somewhere, and similarly remove all the user based access for those that leave. Error creeps in. In this respect it is easier for me to add the user or remove the user to a defined role that has all the required access defined in one pace. If user based access is located in one user interface area dedicated to user access, rather than distributed across various areas of the application it might be a bit more easier to maintain. In this discussion however I think we are talking about the granularity of the access, not a role or user access. I think granularity or how fine the access is is not the same as if it is by role or user id. Here i mean granularity in terms of detail of access to some particular part of a page, a link, a transaction type. And of course the granularity of access required may differ across organisations. Maybe we should think about access levels and how they can be applied at role, [group] or user level at more granular levels than a page. For example only - maybe we need to define access levels at 'module' or page or transaction type (view, create, modify, delete) or menu type link (transaction, report,inquiry etc) Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this! Cheers, On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:30 AM, ExsonQu <hex...@gm...> wrote: > *Dear all:* > > I think we're facing more and more chance to add control > not > based on scripts, as we did now. We need more precision control such as > recently Richard has added bank account constraint and salesman control > etc. > > It'll time consuming to develop control method case by case, > and it'll be difficult for users to master it. > > Does it make sense to develop an extra regular control way > for > this? If so, which one is better? > > Any comments are highly appreciated! > > Thanks and best regards! > > Exson > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://weberp-accounting.1478800.n4.nabble.com/Shall-we-find-a-another-regular-way-to-manage-authority-tp4657044.html > Sent from the web-ERP-developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK > Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. > Download it for free now! > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Web-erp-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers > |