Re: General Database Terminology Question -- Mapping one table into another

Thanks for the information. What is IDEF1X and do they have some kind of glossary of terms on the web?

-Paul

WolfAlpha wrote:

> I'm used to the IDEF1X terminology myself. If your audience is
> tech-oriented, "mapping" can mean many different things to them (mapping for
> me represents the linking of an attribute to its origin/source). I would
> stick with one of the fancier terms (CORRELATION or ASSOCIATIVE) and just
> give a quick run down of what it represents: this type of table allows
> multiple values of one table to be ASSOCIATED with multiple values of
> another table thus allowing the database to enforce the business rules for
> that set of data (or some semblance of defining what it does).
>
> Jeff S
>
> Dave Abercrombie <abe_at_rahul.net> wrote in message
> news:7m0ui8$lrb$1_at_samba.rahul.net...
> > In article <3783ABEA.22F10E35_at_geopak.com>,
> > Paul Schrum <Paul_at_geopak.com> wrote:
> > { My question has to do with the terminology of this practice. I use the
> > { CORRELATION table in a query to filter elements based on their feature.
> > { In conversations with my collegues, we call the CORRELATION table a
> > { "mapping". But in giving a presentation to about 150 people, I want to
> > { be sure I am using the correct word. Is "mapping" the proper term, or
> > { should I use something else?
> >
> > The IDEF1X term is "associative entity" or "associative table". But most
> > likely your 150 people have not heard of IDEF1X either, so "mapping"
> > might be better anyway.
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Dave Abercrombie (510) 653-1204 122 15.23' W
> > abe_at_rahul.net 37 50.97' N
Received on Thu Jul 08 1999 - 08:16:43 CDT