Re: Table(s) definition problem

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote:
> It sounds like a supertype and subtypes rather than very separate types,
> don't you think? I'm guessing a subtype design pattern would work and there
> are several such. --dawn

If they are disjoint sets, as the O.P. indicated, then they represent separate types of things, and should be kept separate.

-- 
output = reverse("gro.gultn" "_at_" "enworbbc")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/spreadsheets.html
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL