Why can't we use the pattern in the Data Model Resource book? It's
simple and it works.
-Adrian
On 3/26/2011 9:57 AM, David E Jones wrote:
On Mar 22, 2011, at 6:27 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
- redesign following a more standard approach
PartyClassificationGroup/PartyClassificationType/PartyClassification
Yes, this is another good one. This the pattern I had in mind:
<entity entity-name="PartyClassification"
package-name="mantle.party.party">
<field name="partyClassificationId" type="id" is-pk="true"/>
<field name="classificationTypeEnumId" type="id"/>
<field name="parentClassificationId" type="id"/>
<field name="description" type="text-long"/>
<relationship type="one" title="PartyClassificationType"
related-entity-name="Enumeration">
<key-map field-name="classificationTypeEnumId"/>
</relationship>
<relationship type="one" title="Parent"
related-entity-name="PartyClassification">
<key-map field-name="parentClassificationId"/>
</relationship>
</entity>
<entity entity-name="PartyClassificationAppl"
package-name="mantle.party.party">
<field name="partyId" type="id" is-pk="true"/>
<field name="partyClassificationId" type="id" is-pk="true"/>
<field name="fromDate" type="date-time" is-pk="true"/>
<field name="thruDate" type="date-time"/>
<relationship type="one" related-entity-name="Party"/>
<relationship type="one" related-entity-name="PartyClassification"/>
</entity>
