On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Robin Jackson wrote:
> The flawed relationship is the one to many relationship between topics and
> articles.
>
> The assumption (incorrect) is that an article pertains to one and only one
> topic.
>
> The correct assumption is that topics contain many articles, and that
> articles can pertain to many topics. As we are all aware the proper way to
> do this is to have a join table.
>
> Codd's normalization rules at least to the third form, are imperative for
> developing
> expandable relational databases. As you are aware, by making sure that data
> is
> only directly associated to the key,
AAMOF, this model is one of the proposed solutions. It is clean, but
IMO, not ideal:
- It makes the 'article space' essentially flat. If you take the
800.000 articles example from our intro document, try finding
yours.
- With no parent you can't easily assign access control to groups
of related articles
The direction the current discussion takes is kind of a compromise
between both. Set up one 'main' tree to hold the content, and use
aliases to populate the 'display' tree. Aliases will probably
be done with join tables, but we'll get to the 'how' of things after
we've defined the 'what'.
> fields
> (extra1, extra2, extra3) etc., expanding the data model does not impact the
> existing
> structures.
The extra fields are going to be redundant with 2.0 anyway.
Bye,
Emile
--
This is The Midgard Project's mailing list. For more information,
please visit the project's web site at http://www.midgard-project.org
To unsubscribe the list, send an empty email message to address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
