20/11/2014 at 13:17 #226518/12/2014 at 14:06 #2579
Let’s analyse this situation.
The two original entities A and B are independent, so we have optionality at both sides of the n:m relation (so in fact it is A (n) : (m) B). we have two ILFs/EIFs: A and B.
Assumption: enriching the key-key entity does not change this and there are no business rules stating otherwise.
So yes, a new independent ILF/EIF C emerged and should be counted. This is not the issue however.
Now let’s have a closer look at A and B.
A is related to C and not to B directly anymore. The same goes for B. One relation was replaced by another one.
If A would get a new independent child, then we would not count A as changed as in fact there is no change. In this situation it doesn’t matter whether this child is new or existing.
In my opinion, in case of a key-key entity enrichment, the parents should be counted as changed, because of the counting guideline 18.104.22.168.
the paragraph 4.21.2 is also used to identify changes, not just to decide on complexity.
Other views invited.28/09/2015 at 10:42 #5209
Originally posted in Dutch by Andreas Schuderer
It has been some time…
Did my answer satisfy?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.