Free Support Forum - aspose.com

String Equivalents for Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType

Hi,

For compatibility with MS Project, I am attempting to reform the text string that I get for Standard Rates and Overtime Rates. £0.00/hr etc.

I cannot find a definitive set of strings that correspond to

Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType

Is there a place there I can find these? or does anyone have a list handy..

Thanks in advance..

Regards, Bruce

Hi Bruce,

They are decimal (integer) values from 0 to 6.

///

/// Specifies the units used by Microsoft Project to display a rate.

///

public enum RateFormatType

{

///

/// Minute

///

Minute,

///

/// Hour

///

Hour,

///

/// Day

///

Day,

///

/// Week

///

Week,

///

/// Month

///

Month,

///

/// Year

///

Year,

///

/// Material resource rate

///

MaterialResourceRate

}

You can find the enumeration description in Aspose.Tasks Help:

Aspose.Tasks for .NET API Reference/Aspose.Tasks Namespace/Rate Class/RateFormatType Enumeration

But I have checked the values with the MSP 2007 xml schema definition at:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb968727.aspx and can see some differences...

I will check the values against MSP 2003/2007 and will be back with update.

Sorry for inconvenience.

Hi Bruce,

I have completed the testing. Despite of the enumerations' differences, reading resources StandardRateFormat elements from MSP Xml files works correctly.

Reading the data from MSP 2003 mpp files is not supported yet (resource’s standard rate format).

Please see below the strings to RateFormatType enumeration correspondence:

“min” - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.Minute

“hr” - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.Hour

“day” - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.Day

“wk” - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.Week

“mo” - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.Month

“yr” - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.Year

“”(empty) - Aspose.Tasks.RateFormatType.MaterialResourceRate

Hi Sergey,

These are the strings I was looking for... I did not expect 'empty' as material resource rate..

Thanks again for the strings ...

I must say that I like the XML and the Object Model you have. It makes it clear that I should be following the new objects and elements rather than using some of the older properties..

Thanks again for the strings..

Regards, Bruce