(02-16-2017, 03:00 PM)Markster Wrote:(02-16-2017, 02:54 PM)JJTL Wrote: Ah, that makes sense to fit the system specific stuff at the OMSF. As always appreciate the info and knowledge, Canard! Even double digit numbers seem a bit odd to me. If Chicopee's assumption turns out to be true (year + number), 1701 to 1714 would be neat.
Incrementing numbers is so passe.
Should just stick with a batch number "01" and use a letter on the end instead.
1701-A
1701-B
1701-C
1701-D
1701-E
...
So your saying we should just go to QR codes then?! Barcodes are what the cool kids use these days...