Except    Clients tend to be businesses with EINs instead of SSNs. So there 
really are Clients. But sometimes in accounting an employee is a vendor because 
you need to draw a check outside of the normal employee employer relationship.

I am trying to normalize this structure. Maybe I shouldn't. I would love to 
hear other people's solutions. but to reiterate, Clients need addresses, People 
need addresses. if I create a table Address, I could relate it back to Client, 
and relate it to Person.

So maybe I should change the name to:

Business
Person

Person  will have two booleans 'isEmployee', and 'isClient', with a SSN 
Business will have two booleans 'isClient', and 'isVendor' with an EIN

both will have a to-many to Address and each address will have a type (i guess 
a business address will not be a 'love-nest').

I just never created an Entity that related back to two other Entities. So does 
that mean 

Business <=>> Addresses
Person <=>> Addresses   

and because of the structure, the relations have to be optional. although an 
address will always be related to either a Business or a Person.


Or how about an Entity Address and a subclass PersonAddress and another 
subclass BusinessAddress?

Opinions?


On Sep 14, 2013, at 10:29 PM, Ramsey Gurley <[email protected]> wrote:

> Personally, I would look more closely at your person class. Is a client 
> actually a person too? It sounds like it. If so, I would not have a client 
> entity. I would simply make a person entity and assign each person one or 
> more roles. A person might have a client role, a vendor role, and a customer 
> role. Then you simply have a relationship between person and address.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Theodore Petrosky <[email protected]> wrote:
> I need an opinion about relationships.
> 
> I want to have an entity  Person with a to-many to address. a Person could 
> have many addresses (home, second home, weekend place, love nest).
> 
> And I have clients. a Client needs addresses too (billing, main office, act 
> rep, etc)
> 
> how would you model this?
> 
> a person entity with a to-many relationship to address
> a client entity with a to-many relationship to address
> 
> or would you create a subclass of address and map that to the clients.
> 
> is it 'bad' to have two to-many relations to an entity, (both person, and 
> client mapped to entity address).
> 
> Ted
>  _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/rgurley%40smarthealth.com
> 
> This email sent to [email protected]
> 

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to