2009/3/19 Lars Helge Øverland <larshe...@gmail.com>: > >> So for India or for South Africa or Sri Lanka data >> elements are "effectively" only members of one dataset? > > > Not quite, a data element can be a member of many data sets, but those data > sets cannot be entered by the same orgunit. I.e. data sets containing common > data elements should be assigned to different orgunits in the hierarchy. >
It seems to me that adding a PeriodType to the DataElement is definitely redundant. DataElement should always be a member of at least one DataSet - and there is already be an (implicit) constraint that DataElements of a DataSet will be of the same PeriodType. What is probably required (if it doesn't yet exist) is an application enforced constraint that a DataElement can only be a member of different DataSets which share the same PeriodType. Given that some of those do exist (the bad practice) then it is considerably better to rename (and re-id) the dataElement. This will anyway be necessary if DataElements become directly associated with PeriodType. I think the only other thing which is achieved by associating the PeriodType with the DataElement is that it would allow for DataSets which a heterogenous mix of DataElement PeriodTypes, which I don't think is a design goal. Regards Bob _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs Post to : dhis2-devs@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
