Philippe, > ... The fact that an EO is deleted when it's removed from the relationship is > technical consequence of a model. Don't use it because it's practical ...
Um, what other reason is there to use owning relationships? The documentation says “If a source object owns its destination object, for example, as when an Agent object owns its Customer objects, then when something happens so that a destination object (Customer) is removed from the relationship, it is also removed from the data source. Ownership implies that an owned object cannot exist without its owner/” (in three-odd different places, but always using essentially the same words), and if there's anything else in there, I can't find it. I might be completely wrong, but this suggests to me that a deletion of object removed from the relationship is the very (and also only) purpose of the ”owns” flag? Thanks and all the best, OC > On 27 Feb 2022, at 14:46, Philippe Rabier <prab...@icloud.com> wrote: > > Hi OC, > > When an EO entity A owns an entity B, consider A and B as a whole. B does > not exist separately. If you'd use a nosql document database, everything will > be in the same document. The best and known examples of usage are invoices or > quotes and their lines. > > What you want to do is to prevent deletion depending of other information > like the invoice status where a hypothetical VALID status would prevent the > deletion of the invoice. In that case and if you use Wonder, you could raise > an exception when the method willDelete is called. > > However, in your case, I have some doubts that a company owns departments > because maybe a department is linked to employees or budget or other stuffs … > a red flag is when you write that all departments must be deleted first > before the company. The fact that an EO is deleted when it's removed from the > relationship is technical consequence of a model. Don't use it because it's > practical in some case ( and in your case, it's not so practical ;-)) > > Philippe > ———————————— > Sent from my iPhone > > >> On 27 Feb 2022, at 12:45, OCsite via Webobjects-dev >> <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com> wrote: >> >> Hi there, >> >> as I am checking all my relationships to make sure I did not another >> mistake, I've bumped into something strange. >> >> It looks like EOF prohibits a combination of “owns destination” and the >> “deny” delete rule. >> >> Can perhaps anybody explain the rationale behind that? >> >> I must be overlooking something of importance, for it seems to me it is >> quite acceptable approach something like “a company owns all the >> departments. Whenever one is removed from the relationship, it should be >> deleted, no point for it existing separately. Still, I want to prevent >> deletion of a whole company which contains a non-zero number of departments; >> to prevent user errors, if somebody does want to delete a company, I want >> him to remove all its departments first”. >> >> What am I missing? >> >> Thanks, >> OC >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. >> Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) >> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: >> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/prabier%40icloud.com >> >> This email sent to prab...@icloud.com
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
