Yes, I am leaning more to assigning a role to the relation and calling getRelations (type, role, search) .
However, can you elaborate more on using a "NODE" typed field. I was unaware of this alternative? How can this be used? Curtney On Thursday 29 July 2004 12:50 am, Michiel Meeuwissen wrote: > Curtney Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > First, let me apologize for all of the questions I have been asking. I am > > sorry if I am wearing out my welcome. However, I need to get up to speed > > with mmbase real quick. > > > > It seems that the only way to get a specific node's relations is to call > > one of the getRelations methods on that node. which either return a list > > or vector containg the relations. However, I want a specific child node > > that is related to a parent node. There will only ever be one chid of > > that relation created for that parent. (one-to-one) > > You could have considered not using a relation at all, but a "NODE" typed > field. > > > The situation is that I wiould like a "static link" (a url that represent > > the static location of my publication on disk) Every publication will > > have exactly one static url or one relation named "staticlinkrel". How do > > I dynamically retrieve that url in code without having to iterate/filter > > through a list or vector of relation objects? I know there will only be > > one object of that relation anyway. > > You could also assign a role to the relation, and then retrieve all > relations of that certain role, which would yield only one result then. > > You could even query insrel yourself (but that is not very nice). > > > Michiel
