Yes, it does seem that your suggestion reduces redundancy without sacrificing search capability.
Hans Fugal wrote: >But then you have to store call-numbers possibly many times. For >example, a professional researcher would doubtless perform many searches >in any particular US Census. For that Census the repository, source, call >number and description would all be the same for every repository-source >record. The only unique information in each record would be the >activity-id. Yet if we take out the activity-id from repository-source >we get rid of that redundancy. AFAICS there is no loss of querying power >when we do so - search has all three keys, so if you want to know which >searches you did on a particular call-number, you only have to query the >search table with the repository-id and source-id. Or am I still >missing something? > > _______________________________________________ gdmxml mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fugal.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gdmxml
