I am trying to describe the convention the DAS uses for relationships in
the absence of explicit configuration and I am have trouble being
concise. For example, consider two tables (CUSTOMER, ORDER) each with a
PK named "ID". Also, ORDER has a FK named CUSTOMER_ID. The DAS
recognizes this convention and assumes a one:many relationship between
CUSTOMER and ORDER. In the fully dynamic case, a read of CUSTOMER and
ORDER tables using a join will result in a graph of CUSTOMER DataObjects
along with their related ORDERS.
The property for the CUSTOMER Types list of ORDERs is named "ORDER" so:
DataObject order = cust.getDataObject("ORDER[1]");
This is all fine so far. What I am having trouble with is the name of
the property in the ORDER Type that references the parent CUSTOMER. I
think it is currently "parent_opposite" so:
DataObject cust = order.getDataObject("CUSTOMER_OPPOSITE")
Is this still true? I can't find a relevant example.
Thanks.
--
Kevin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
