http://ofbiz.116.s1.nabble.com/Party-Relationship-Best-Practices-tp170029p170044.html
> Chris Thanks.
> BTW I just got the two modeling books. So I am now trying to use the
> correct terminology.
> Beyond entity there is supertypes entities, subtypes (exclusive and non
> exclusive)entities, Attributes, Relationships, intersection, and
> Association.
>
> From the book Vol 1 pages 8-12
> An entity, is something Significant about which the Enterprise wishes to
> store information.
> A subtype is a classification of an entity that has characteristics,
> such as attributes or relationships in common with more general entities.
> An Attribute holds a particular piece of information about the entity.
> A relationship defines how two entities are associated.
>
> rest is not from the book parse.
> the relationships have foreingKeys and is defined as the presence of
> another entities primary ID in a Entity. BTW silverstone does equate
> tables to entities.
>
> So with that as a frame work, what is it you are showing?
>
>
>
> Chris Howe sent the following on 7/23/2006 1:24 PM:
>> After rereading that website, it should be entity (not
>> entity table) and associative entity (not relationship
>> table).
>>
>> --- Chris Howe <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> 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!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>