Posted by
cjhowe on
URL: http://ofbiz.116.s1.nabble.com/Party-Relationship-Best-Practices-tp170029p170037.html
Let me retract the use of the word "Object" and
replace it with "Entity". I didn't use "entity"
initially because the mailing list has used the word
entity to refer to any table in the data model which
is broader than what I'm describing.
Entity tables: Invoice, Product, ProductCategory,
BillingAccount, etc
differs from Relationship tables
Relationship tables: InvoiceRole, ProductCategoryRole,
BillingAccountRole, etc.
All of the tables that end in "Role" describe the
relationship between the prefix Entity (ie
InvoiceRole, the prefix is Inovice) and the entity
"Party".
This site is similar to how I understand the actual
semantics of this type of discussion. If it will make
it easier, I will use word choice from it.
http://www.utexas.edu/its/windows/database/datamodeling/--- BJ Freeman <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> I know that means something to you, but does not
> convey much to me.
> At least as far as how you see Objects in Entities.
> At this point not trying to get into weather they
> should or should not
> be changed, just the semantics.
>
> Chris Howe sent the following on 7/23/2006 8:56 AM:
> > ie BillingAccountRole, ProductCategoryRole,
> > BudgetRole, InvoiceRole, etc
> >
> > --- BJ Freeman <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> When I read about "OBJECT", from a programming
> point
> >> of view, I have an
> >> entirely different perspective than the Entity
> >> Definition In the Data
> >> model books they are based on.
> >>
> >> So could you define your terms, maybe give an
> >> example of what this is about.
> >>
> >> It would help for clearer communication, IMHO.
> >>
> >> Chris Howe sent the following on 7/22/2006 11:38
> PM:
> >>> In the wiki
http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/ZAE , I have
> >>> listed all of the entities that do not comply
> with
> >> the
> >>> ObjectRole entity approach of showing a
> >> relationship
> >>> between a party and an object.
> >>>
> >>> Some of these implementations may be just fine.
> >> Some
> >>> of the implementations may have been done before
> >>> utilization of the ObjectRole type of entity.
> >> Some of
> >>> these entities may not make sense to use the
> >>> ObjectRole approach.
> >>>
> >>> Whatever the case, I would appreciate any
> feedback
> >> on
> >>> each of these entities that knowledgable people
> >> can
> >>> offer.
> >>>
> >>> Once it is determined that the ObjectRole entity
> >> would
> >>> be a better approach for an entity, we can make
> a
> >> JIRA
> >>> issue for it and tackle the upgrade.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks all!
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>