You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Working through entity relationship diagrams and examples for each of them, and came across an interesting case: we'd always envisioned that it'd be okay to use SC-DEX for expressing organization only relationships (an organization might not have a geospatial location, they might be remote, etc) but I'm having a hard time coming up with an example for location only based affiliations with no organizational identifier attached.
On principle, I'd like to keep SC-DEX as flexible as possible, and so allowing location to location affiliations seems fine, but at the same time, it seems like locations should always have an organization accompanying.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
Working through entity relationship diagrams and examples for each of them, and came across an interesting case: we'd always envisioned that it'd be okay to use SC-DEX for expressing organization only relationships (an organization might not have a geospatial location, they might be remote, etc) but I'm having a hard time coming up with an example for location only based affiliations with no organizational identifier attached.
On principle, I'd like to keep SC-DEX as flexible as possible, and so allowing location to location affiliations seems fine, but at the same time, it seems like locations should always have an organization accompanying.
Thoughts?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions