Yes, I think this is correct. The best way to make sure is to look at
the demo data, like the DemoOrderPeopleData.xml file and a few others
have PartyRelationship data in them.
-David
On May 1, 2009, at 11:45 AM, Andrew Zeneski wrote:
The PartyRelationship entity always confuses me, and some of the
demo data makes it even more confusing. I see it going many ways. My
understanding of it is:
"partyIdTo" in the role of "roleTypeIdTo" is a
"partyRelationshipTypeId" of "partyIdFrom" in the role of
"roleTypeIdFrom"
In the case where we have a group, say Company and a user "100" who
is an employee:
"100" in the role of "EMPLOYEE" is a "EMPLOYMENT" of "Company" in
the role of "ORGANIZATION_ROLE"
we could also say:
"100" in the role of "EMPLOYEE" is a "GROUP_ROLLUP" of "Company" in
the role of "ORGANIZATION_ROLE"
What about a prospective contact association? Contact's ID is 200. I
would say this:
"200" in the role of "PROSPECT" is a "CONTACT_REL" of "100" in the
role of "_NA_"
In both of these cases, the MEMBER is the TO and the CONTAINER is
the FROM.
Is this everyone else's understanding as well??
Andrew
