I’m asking about the name of the field “Also acts as delivery note”
The Credit note is considered a sales return to our warehouses
so the field “Also acts as delivery note” i thing it suppose to be “Also acts as goods receipt”
and same as for Debit Notes
Am I correct?
Thats because delivery notes can only be linked to customers. So incase you dont want to select “Also act as delivery note” on credit notes then you have to issue a delivery note but with negative quantities.
@lubos would it be possible in future to select supplier on DNs and Customers on GRNs?
Thanks for your reply
I’m only talking about the name of the field not the function as i did not use the function yet. 
This is just terminology issue. Perhaps these documents should be renamed to Customer Delivery and Supplier Delivery. And customer return is still Customer Delivery but with negative quantities.
I think Delivery Notes and Goods Received Note are standard terminologies and are better this way.
I would suggest place both after inventory tab and allow selection of customer/supplier on DNs/GRNs (DN to supplier will affect only qty to receive and GRN to customer will affect qty to deliver no need to change that).
Already selection of both is possible on Payments and Receipts Tabs so it would bring more consistency to Manager.
Yes but jargon for accounting like any profession/occupation is part of creating greater clarity amongst wide ranges of people. So it is not a good idea just to try to come up with some terms just to facilitate some issue for some users while it may confuse those familiar with taught jargon.
It is inevitable that there will always be some issues and confusion about the wide range of users, usage, taxations, etc. Please try to keep it simple and where it can not further be addressed just say so. As this is now reduced to a terminology issue the advise could simply be to familiarise yourself with the proper terminology and understand that putting a negative number is the same as reversing the action but keeping a straight record.
I don’t see any issue with the terminology used by @lubos. The convention opts to emphasize the direction in its naming, while @lubos opts to show the couterpart to the exchange.
In fact, since these returns must have their corresponding Debit/Credit Notes and the current workflow is genius for making a shortcut method that enforces proper controls. So I wouldn’t change the current setup.
However the naming could be made even clearer, I a Credit Note serving as a Sales Return and a Debit Note serving as a Purchase Return would be unmistakable and will avoid the need for arbitrary positive and negative figures.
