[AccessD] Logic issue

Right, although this *might* be simplifying a little.

We (Roz and I) work for a big Law firm who use a software package called...
wait for it... Case.  Conceptually, the basic object is a 'case', which will
have (amongst other things) the following:

	- Capacities
	- Entities
	- Details
	- Activities

It's best to think of the 'case' as the container for the capacities,
details etc. within.  These are almost like properties and methods of a
class; come to think of it they probably are.

Capacities are types of a person or persons, such as Claimant, Client,
Defendant, Police, Third-party Insurer etc.  Entities are instances of those
capacities, i.e. an instance of the Defendant capacity could be Mr. Smith
who would be the entity.  A bit like a UDT, capacities have several
associated properties (name, address etc.)  Capacities can be linked to each
other (eg. Def. and Def. insurer) using an extremely convoluted method
called the 'acting for' which makes me shudder just thinking about it.

Details are more basic 'properties'.  Common ones we use are Claimant's
Vehicle Registration, Defendant's Policy Number etc.

Activities can be thought of as Methods of a class, and will 'do' certain
things like produce a letter to Defendant's Solicitor.  By the sounds of it,
these wouldn't be that important to you.

Discussing this with Roz, she pointed out that having all the capacity types
in one big list has never phased our 200+ users who are at all points on the
spectrum in terms of computer literacy.  Trust us, just bung 'em all in
together.  Give each capacity a type, and leave it at that.

To sum up, each 'case' has 'capacities' (people), 'details' (things), and
'activities' (methods to perform tasks in your 'case'.)

I've horrendously over-simplified a piece of software it's taken me 6 months
to find my way around so if none of it makes sense, please do ask!

HTH in some small way
Tom




-----Original Message-----
From: DWUTKA at marlow.com [mailto:DWUTKA at marlow.com] 
Sent: 24-Aug-2005 19:16
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Logic issue

I think you need to have a 'people' table.  Whether a person is a judge,
lawyer, defendant should be determined by relationships to the tables
relating to those designations.

Drew

-------------- next part --------------

The contents of this message and any attachments are the property of Donns Solicitors 
and are intended for the confidential use of the named recipient only.  They may be legally
 privileged and should not be communicated to, or relied upon, by any other party without 
our written consent.  If you are not the addressee, please notify us immediately so that we 
can make arrangements for its return.  You should not show this e-mail to any person or
 take copies as you may be committing a criminal or civil offence for which you may be
 liable.  The statement and opinions expressed in this e-mail message are those of the 
writer, and do not necessarily represent that of Donns Solicitors.  Although any files attached
 to this e-mail will have been checked with virus protection software prior to transmission, 
you should carry out your own virus check before opening any attachment.  
Donns Solicitors does not accept any liability for any damage or loss which may be caused 
by software viruses...