Oh! Now I get it. Thanks for being patient! -Scott
On Aug 26, 2013, at 11:43 PM, Tejas Patil <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Scott, > Let me put it this way: > > Employee { > name:.. > ...... > boss: [null / Employee / string] > } > > Each record represents a single employee along with all his/her details. > Field "boss" points to the boss of the current employee. There is at max > one boss for an employee. > > Thanks, > Tejas > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Scott Stults < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Right, but aren't we looking for multiple Employees there? The way I >> interpret the original schema, a boss may only have a single Employee. >> Maybe I'm just not understanding the data model. >> >> -Scott >> >> >> On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:45 PM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I think the schema is a valid Union, so it allows null, or Employee, or >>> string for boss. >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Scott Stults < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Lewis, >>>> >>>> In your schema, should the type for boss be a union of null and an array >>>> of Employee? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> {"name": "boss", "type":["null","Employee","string"]}, >>>> >>>> >>>> -Scott >> >>
