Re: One-To-One Relationships

From: Cimode <>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 10:41:21 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>

On Dec 3, 4:16 pm, "David Cressey" <> wrote:
> "Cimode" <> wrote in message news:b9592be8-2ddb-4ead-
> > It seems we both have a communication problem...I am truly trying hard
> > to give a chance to E/R modeling...
> Let's work a little while on the difference between analysis and design.
> It's possible that you will conclude, at the end of the day, that you can
> do all the analysis you need to in your head, and the only thing you need
> to record is design.
Hey that's the answer to *what is the difference between analysis and design*? I do not perceive a primal need to separate what you seem to designate as analysis from what you seem to call as design. To me they are a part of the same process which can allow to build a logical inference system. I may conceive that they require different tools depending on people sensibilities but I personally use Notepad for both so I am not truly sensitive to that argument.

> That's not the conclusion I came to, but different people think and work
> differently.
That I can relate to. I would like an answer to the initial question: in E/R what's better or more elementary than a name to distinguish an entity from another. As yo useem to use E/R intensively, I thought I might ask but I don't get a clear response. Can I consider that the answer in E/R would be *any attribute subset*?

> An E/R model helps me summarize (and diagram) the information requirements
> of a system, without embedding any aspects of the solution in the
> requirements description. You might need a different tool for that purpose,
> or no tool at all.
See above...

Regards... Received on Mon Dec 03 2007 - 19:41:21 CET

Original text of this message