[AccessD] A noun is a person place or thing - what is an Event?

I like this approach because if more associates are added later they would
not get left out. Super good forward thinking thinking Arthur.
On May 27, 2013 11:53 PM, "Arthur Fuller" <fuller.artful at gmail.com> wrote:

> One possibility is to include an EventType column, with one value
> identifying company events such as the annual picnic and another value
> identifying employee events. Depending on that value, you could switch the
> rowsource of the combobox to suit. Both types of events could reside in a
> single table, with queries identifying one type or the other. Just a
> thought.
>
> Arthur
>
>
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:22 PM, William Benson (VBACreations.Com) <
> vbacreations at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I realize I have used "latter approach" kind of ambiguously in the
> "latter"
> > sentence.
> >
> >
> > LOL    (Lots of Latters)...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William Benson (VBACreations.Com) [mailto:vbacreations at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 11:20 PM
> > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> > Subject: A noun is a person place or thing - what is an Event?
> >
> > Hi this may well be long-ago-covered ground, but I am stuck in a
> relational
> > database conundrum.
> >
> > Simple world, there are companies, they have associates (people), those
> > people have events, and those events require notification circles.
> >
> > For example, a driver for a trucking company, may have a medical
> > inspection,
> > notification of the due date for which, is to be sent to the trucker as
> > well
> > as the company's dispatcher (so that, after a certain date, the
> dispatcher
> > will remember not to send that trucker on any routes without proof of
> > completed medical check).
> >
> > I am struggling over whether to make all events tied to the company with
> a
> > FK, or whether to make all events tied to an Associate, thus only
> > indirectly
> > tied to the Company.
> >
> > The reason for my second-guessing the latter approach, which on the face
> of
> > things seems obvious, is scalability. Suppose there are certain kinds of
> > events which are not related to associates, but based on the company
> > itself.
> > I can't think of too many of examples of these off-hand, but for example,
> > certain marketing oriented events, or billing related events, might be
> > worth
> > tracking.
> >
> > If I chose the other approach, to work at a Company level, create an
> Event
> > for that company, then choose the Associate(s) for whom the Event
> mattered,
> > then it seems all bases would be covered.
> >
> > Am I right in leaning towards the latter approach?
> >
> > --
> > AccessD mailing list
> > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Arthur
> Cell: 647.710.1314
>
> Prediction is difficult, especially of the future.
>   -- Niels Bohr
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>