On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:10, Murray Cumming <murr...@murrayc.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 09:33 +0200, Michael Jenny wrote: >> [snip] >> >> > >> > I'm fairly sure that in most cases, and in your case, you should really >> > have an intermediate table, because, in your example, not just one >> > person can have an iPhone. >> > >> >> Absolutely. That example was not really representative. >> >> > For instance, this uses an invoice lines table, which has both an >> > Invoice ID value and a Product ID value. You can then use a regular >> > choices drop-down: >> > http://www.glom.org/wiki/index.php?title=Screenshots#The_Details_View_-_related_records >> >> Yes, that is for m:n relations. An intermediary table is necessary, >> because the foreign object is shareable among peer records. But as you >> said, the question is if there are *that* many real world examples, >> where the related object is not shareable. > > As a start, it would be interesting to know of one real world example.
Easy: A library, where people can lend books. Each person can lend n books, but each book is either available or lent to one very person. Now suppose you want to show the person's lent books in a related list. > > > -- > Murray Cumming > murr...@murrayc.com > www.murrayc.com > www.openismus.com > _______________________________________________ glom-devel-list mailing list glom-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/glom-devel-list
