[AccessD] This seems to get me often

Jim Lawrence accessd at shaw.ca
Wed Dec 24 14:04:27 CST 2014


Same to you Arthur. :-)

Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur Fuller" <fuller.artful at gmail.com>
To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:59:43 AM
Subject: Re: [AccessD] This seems to get me often

There's no such thing as a simple app. I have made that mistake more times
than I can count. And I know that some of you, perhaps most, are happy with
3NF but I am not. I almost always go to BCNF or 5NF.

Merry Christmas and/or happy holidays to everyone on this list.

Arthur

On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Susan Harkins <ssharkins at gmail.com> wrote:

> I completely agree. I had to pull up the animal db to see what I ended up
> doing. I have an institution table and a contact table.
>
> Susan H.
>
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Charlotte Foust <
> charlotte.foust at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Susan,
> >
> > I recognize your situation and understand.  Just know that the simple
> apps
> > have a way of sticking around forever and user appetites for new reports
> > and features usually leads to a  need for normalization.  For me it's
> > easier to just design that way from the start.  I'm lazy!
> >
> > Charlotte
> > On Dec 24, 2014 5:28 AM, "Susan Harkins" <ssharkins at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Charlotte, this makes perfect sense, but it isn't the way I would
> > approach
> > > it for a db I might be working on, but then, mine would be small and
> > > specific. I know some of you use Access to create dbs with a much
> broader
> > > scope and that definitely impacts your design. I think perhaps the
> > smaller
> > > the project, the more freedom you have -- I might be wrong. :)
> > >
> > > It's kind of interesting because I downloaded a few knitting patterns
> > this
> > > morning and it hit me that designing a database is really a very
> creative
> > > endeavor. You have a pattern, you have stitches that you know and have
> > used
> > > for years -- but still, we all seem to bring our own personal process
> to
> > > the project. :) Another knitter can observe and with a minimal amount
> of
> > > explanation from you, they might say, "That's not how I would've done
> it,
> > > but that's nice!" :)
> > >
> > > When I stopped working in and writing about Access, I don't think I
> > > realized how hard it would be to reclaim the skill. It's like riding a
> > bike
> > > right? Um... not for me. And speaking of... I tried riding a bike with
> my
> > > granddaughter a few years back. That wasn't so easy either. :)
> > >
> > > Susan H.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Charlotte Foust <
> > > charlotte.foust at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The donation table contains donation, amount, date, donorID, perhaps
> > type
> > > > of donation (i.e. pledge, lump sum, in kind, etc.).  You have a
> persons
> > > > table that includes a field for companyID because you probably want
> to
> > > > address any thank yous to that person's attention at their company,
> if
> > > > any.  The Company table is just that, companies.  It may have
> multiple
> > > > addresses so those are linked to the persons table.  If you put
> > contacts
> > > > into the company table, you will either wind up overwriting the
> > contacts
> > > > for future donations, or you'll have duplicates of the company for
> > > > different contacts.  The persons and companies table have addresses
> in
> > an
> > > > Address table whose PK is inserted as an FK in the appropriate table.
> > > Does
> > > > that seem any clearer?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Charlotte
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Susan Harkins <ssharkins at gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A donor can be an individual or an organization -- they're all
> > donors.
> > > > > Donor is the entity, the name and type of donor all belong to
> donor.
> > > > Right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Susan H.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Charlotte Foust <
> > > > > charlotte.foust at gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > ​Not without denormalizing the table.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Charlotte​
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Susan Harkins <
> > ssharkins at gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is there anyway to have orgs and individuals in the same table?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > AccessD mailing list
> > > > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > > > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > > >
> > > > --
> > > > AccessD mailing list
> > > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > > --
> > > AccessD mailing list
> > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> > --
> > AccessD mailing list
> > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>



-- 
Arthur
-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com



More information about the AccessD mailing list