Timeline for How to represent the following ternary relationship
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 18 at 17:05 | answer | added | Shreyank Isiri | timeline score: 1 | |
| S Dec 30, 2018 at 21:26 | history | suggested | Glorfindel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
image fixed (inlining HTTP images doesn't work anymore); for more info, see https://gist.github.com/Glorfindel83/9d954d34385d2ac2597bbe864466259f
|
| Dec 30, 2018 at 18:02 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Dec 30, 2018 at 21:26 | |||||
| Sep 11, 2015 at 12:06 | answer | added | Todd Everett | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 9, 2015 at 17:03 | comment | added | Steve Mangiameli | Thinking on your question a little more, if you only want to show an employee in a single location, remove the line connectiong Employee to Works_in3 and connect Employee to Locations. One location per employee would result in a one to many from Location to Employee via LocationID. | |
| Sep 9, 2015 at 16:14 | comment | added | Steve Mangiameli | Your depiction shows the possibility of several many to many relationships, not that there are such relationships. An ERD would be much more effective in conveying the relationships between entities. Even so, depending on the business model, an employee could possible work out of multiple locations and departments - think education or medical. | |
| Sep 9, 2015 at 15:14 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 9, 2015 at 15:15 | |||||
| Sep 9, 2015 at 15:13 | history | asked | swansong | CC BY-SA 3.0 |