I am confused again. How would you design this : Invoice <--> Payment
where each invoice can have multiple payments and each payment can pay multiple invoice. Isn't it natural to have a tuple (invoice, payment, amount) which is a join and also have attribute that is essential ? anders pearson wrote: > On 2005-11-01 21:43:52 -0500, Jeff Watkins wrote: > > > Since we're left to implement it ourselves, I would suggest making an > > explicit join object: > > > > Person -> Call -> PhoneNumber > > honestly, this sounds like a *better* approach than some kind of mapping > join type. > > in my mind, if a many-to-many relationship has additional fields on it, > it's no longer a relationship and becomes an entity in its own right. > > i would argue that adding a Join type with additional fields to > SQLObject would be a misfeature. SQLObject isn't preventing you from > normalizing your database. > > -- > anders pearson : http://www.columbia.edu/~anders/ > C C N M T L : http://www.ccnmtl.columbia.edu/ > weblog : http://thraxil.org/
