It would be nice to have both the weight (t) and volume (m3) represented in the purchase order.
So if I am buying 500 units of water - I know that takes up a specific amount of weight and space ie: do I have enough room on my ship…do I need multiple journeys etc…
Volume is already there. 
That’s the total price, not volume in terms of shipping size.
lol you don’t understand the meaning of a goofy emoji
(they were saying that sarcastically)
Correct, although I’m hinting at a broader point, which is that “Volume” isn’t the best name for that field. “Total” would be better. Then you could add volume and weight info separately.
I brought this up before, and someone said “Volume is standard terminology on trading systems”, and sure, maybe that’s true, but so what?
That’s pretty counterproductive on a serious suggestion.
Good morning - thank you for the feedback - I would concur that the usage of “volume” on the screen is correct from a financial point of view - however it is not generally used as a term to describe the total cost of items - except perhaps in some financial markets (stock and agricultural exchanges). For most where you are purchasing specific items I would suggest updating the term “volume” to “Total” or “Total Cost”.
My suggestion in this post is entirely related to having the weight/volume metrics listed as well as the costs associated with the purchase.
Have a great day 