Prompts before saving ticket if entities not selected

Hi folks,

Only been looking at SambaPOS for a few days and I love what I see.

Currently I need the process to check that a couple of entities have been assigned to a ticket before it can be sent to the kitchen.

These are

  1. A table has been selected or the ticket as been marked as “To Go”
  2. An employee has been assigned to the ticket

I have implemented Employee entities as suggested to me on another question and I have seen in the forums that several people have given advice on the “To Go” option so hopefully that one is going to be easy ;-).

So all I need to know for now is how to prompt the user to select the required entities.

Many thanks in advance for any help given

Tony

have a search, you’ll find your answer :smile:
Replied to question very similar about a week ago and did the trick for him.

Hi,

I had seen that answer and your comments within it do mention about prompts.

After reading your comments I had tried creating a simple “Before Ticket Closing” rule that has a constraint of {ENTITY:Tables} Is null, like you mention, if so the Prompt Message action is performed. But nothing happens.

I have tried many different things and as a newbie I am sure my lack of experience is just making me go round in circles so I was hoping for more clues :wink:

Regards

Tony

OK,
Should be able to help,
Can you post screenshot of your ‘ask question’ action and your ‘before ticket close’ rule (be sure to ‘open/expand’ the actions so we can see the settings for them)?

Hi,

I am not asking a question but just trying to show a message that tells the user to select a table.

Here is my error prompt

and here is my rule

The mappings for the rule are all *

In addition, once the message is displayed, is there a way to cancel the button event or do I create an action that sets the status to something like “InComplete” and check the status in the Ticket Close rule.

At this point I am playing around with different approaches to gain more knowledge of SambaPOS so I really appreciate your help

Regards

Tony

Thats fair enough, the ask question pop up severs a similar function but prefered by many as is a more attractive form of message/pop. Its my preference but your welcome to do anyway you like.
You could use the shell subtitle module and put a notification on the top of the ticket box or many other ways.

Your right looking at what I said that the message/ask question/prompt will not stop the ticket being closed as it is. Again there will be many ways to do this, I generally work on a workflow basis and do not know all the tricket so there is probably a more ‘educated’ way but first thought would be to constrain the ticket close button and or the sebtle (depending again on your work flow).
How are you marking the ticket to go?
Obviously you only need the table number constraint on the eat in orders.

In fact you need to change how Close button works. Edit existing Close Ticket rule and try using action constraints.

That will contain both Close Ticket & Show Message actions. '{ENTITY NAME:Tables}' != '' constraint means in order to execute close ticket action {ENTITY NAME:Tables} value should be different (!=) than empty (’’ means empty). You can use reverse logic for Show Message action. If table name is (==) empty this action will work. Else it won’t work. Either case only one of these actions will work. It will close ticket or show a message.

2 Likes

What I was trying to get out of @tstallan was if there were any other ways out, ie FASH CASH buttons, as these would also need to be constrained in a similar way :slight_smile:

I agree that a better workflow would be to use the subtitle module for the messaging and constrain the button until my conditions are met. In that other post you had also mentioned about setting the status to CanClose or something like that and constraining on the status which is another good approach…

I have been a software developer for 30 years and I’m doing this for my wife’s Bistro and of course brownie points. So I love all of the options available to me.

I am using this example to gain knowledge on rules, actions, etc but got stumped at my first hurdle of bringing up a basic prompt.

As for the “To Go” bit, I haven’t even looked at that yet, didn’t want to over complicate things until I gained a better understanding.

Regards

Tony

To give a little background at our Bistro we have

  1. Dine in. Table needs to be allocated and kitchen ticket produced

  2. Walk in. A person comes straight to the till, orders a coffee and then sits outside on an empty table.No need for a table allocation

  3. Food Take Away. Order has to go to kitchen but no table

  4. Product purchase. No kitchen ticket and no table.

If I can get #1 working with the prompts/conditions I want then I should have gained enough knowledge to get the others working

All good fun…more interesting than my current work :wink:

Tony

Ahhh.

Adding constraints directly to the action calls…missed that one. That answers a couple of questions I hadn’t even asked yet

Thanks

Tony

You would have to separate eat in and to go in some way to give options on constraints.
Your country and VAT/Tax factors may also be a factor as in UK if VAT registered eat in and to go can effect VAT allocation ie one I had to setup for cafe where take sausage roll, to eat in is always ‘VATed’ but to take away hot is ‘VATed’ but take away cold is not :confounded: - this would depend on country and business etc.

I think most examples of eat in and to go are done through departments from what Ive seen (an thats how I did the cafe mentioned)

There are many ways to do most things and which is best obviously is specific to your setup.

As an example as your situation seems to resemble the cafe setup I helped with locally, I did departments but I do not think in V4 there is an easy way to make the selection of departments forced on login so you may opt for a ticket tag or state or maybe ticket type. If TAX/VAT is like the example above department or ticket type would be best options as these are mappable in TAX Templates beside product groups and products.

When you know how you want to differentiate eat in and to go you can then expand on the other workflow options layed out but eatin/togo would most likely be the first step in the flow.

Eating in would take you down the route of requiring a table number and your constraints etc can be bound to that option. (ignore kitchen print for now, will get to that)

Imagin this would be treated as a ‘togo’ no table required as you say

Again - ‘togo’, (again ignore kitchen print for now)

‘togo’? Not sure on this one.

Kitchen ticket is easy, you can just map the kitchen order print job to the required product group/products.

While slightly different I read/was part of a topic where if I remember correctly the table requirement was set on a food ticket basis. I think that might actually be the one you refereed to about ‘canclose’. In that a rule on product added (kitchen/food product group(s)) the ticket, think that was done via ticket tag for table required but don’t quote me on that. If you went down that route imagine you might was to have a table of ‘to-go’ which would not be a bad thing as the kitchen/waiter would know its to go to counter/waiting area.

As always there are lots of routes to take :smile:
I wouldn’t like to tell you which route to take but happy to help/advise where I can (although im no expert - yet lol)

After looking back through that the kitchen print/food product -> table number requirement may not be an option as you have have a table with non kitchen printed items (coffee maybe if not from kitchen or cold drinks).

Easiest way for eat in and to go is with ticket Tags not departments. Ticket tags can easily be read for VAT.

Sorry, didn’t realise ticket tag could be used to map tax.
That wouldn’t be using the built in tax templates though would it? A separate calculation?