Im in the same position. I can say that deriving things from Taggable seems smelly. Tagging is only an "aspect".
I think you may be able to use a single Taggable table with a Many-To- Any mapping. I'm not sure how to do this without having to manually add discriminators whenever i add a new taggable entity type. On Jan 16, 7:25 pm, ajaishankar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I'm trying to figure out which is the best way to map the following > many to many relation in NH. > > It would be great if you could point me in the right direction. > > In my domain I have unrelated entities that are "taggable". > > Page has many Tags > Product has many Tags > > What would be the preferred approach to model this? > > 1. Put each association in its own link table (Page_Tags, > Product_Tags) > > 2. Or would it be possible to put all the links in a single link table > Entity_Tags (EntityType, EntityId, TagId) > > Is this the purpose for <many-to-any> mapping? > > 3. I'm also thinking of deriving everything from a Taggable class - > but don't know if that is right > > In this case everything would be in Taggable_Tags > > Thanks > > Ajai
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.
