IWSM 2018 Forums Sizing Sizing – FPA Relationship change in enhancement

This topic contains 3 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  EdwinvanGorp 3 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • #2264

    Ye olde Phorum

    Two independent ILF/EIF have a 1 : (1) relationship. This relationship is changed to 1 : (N) without a change of attributes.
    Does that change the first, the second, both or no ILF/EIF?

    Originally posted in Dutch by Andreas Schuderer
    Tussen twee bestaanszelfstandige ILGV/KGV bestaat een 1:(1)-relatie. De relatie verandert naar 1:(N) zonder dat er attributen wijzigen. Is daardoor de eerste, de tweede, beide, of geen van de ILGV/KGV gewijzigd?


    Martin Jacobs

    Originally posted in Dutch by Andreas Schuderer

    Hello Andreas,

    It took some time.
    To Nesma guidelines do not describe this transition. The LF’s were and, after the transition still are, independent.
    In my opinion the optional entity should be counted as changed however, because it has a constraint that changes functionally. It is the constraint on its foreign key.
    Other views invited.



    Ian Alyss

    I read somewhere that you are working on an improved definition of enhancement. Will this situation be covered by the new definition?

    Regards, Ian



    In my opinion, the two logical files do not change due to this modification. Appearantly, the data-element that will be part of the primary key of the second LF after the change already existed prior to the change. The only thing that changes in the LF’s is that this particular data-element will be part of the primary key. Looking at the counting guidelines, this is no reason to identify a changed LF.

    I agree with Martin that a constraint on the LF changes, but that will be expressed in changed user transactions that use and/or modify that particular LF.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.