Re: Other or not? (again)

"Felix E. Klee" <felix.klee_at_inka.de> wrote in message news:20040908171125.154a52ee.felix.klee_at_inka.de...
> On 8 Sep 2004 05:17:46 -0700 Tony Andrews wrote:
> > It's hard to address your questions, because your database design
> > doesn't seem to make sense (to me).
>
> Yes, that's right: It doesn't make sense. I must have had my mind
> somewhere else when I wrote this, and, unfortunately, I didn't prove
> read it before reposting it. The correct design is as follows:
>
> PERSON_CERTIFICATES
> person_certificate_id (PK)
> person_id (FK)
> certificate_type_id (FK)
>
> PERSON_CERTIFICATE_TYPES
> person_certificate_type_id (PK)
> certificate_type_desc
>
> Now, I still wonder how to best deal with person certificate types that
> are missing in PERSON_CERTIFICATE_TYPES. I seems that this is a trivial
> question. However, I'd still like to hear an opinion on it.
>
> Felix
Received on Wed Sep 08 2004 - 21:44:30 CEST