table occurence vs direct relationship

[smishler]

I've been working with FMP for awhile now (on a relatively smiple level) but can't quite get my head around the difference or pros/cons of linking tables with direct relationships versus table occurences. Someone have a good explanation of the difference? Thanks.

[Søren Dyhr]

You can only link TO's ...it's not an explanation, but I'm struggling with what you call a direct relationship - exsists such things??

--sd

[Stuart Taylor]

The reason that more than one table occurance exist ... or one reason is that you can not have more than one path to the same field in the same table occurance in a line of relationships else it will get all loopie. Same is for self related tables.

It can be a bit of a mind bender at first if your used to v6 logic. I still struggle sometimes.

[smishler]

It's beginning to become clear now. Through the posts and a couple reference books, I see that the TOs are graphical representations (like an alias?) of the tables to help maintain order among several relationships (especially relationships involving a common field). It is considerably different than FM6. Thanks.

[Søren Dyhr]

It is!!! ....and Mike Harris is one of best to explain the change of metaphor:

http://www.digfm.org/ref/FM7_key_concepts.pdf

--sd

[smishler]

Excellent, excellent resource! 3 things were key to my confusion:

1) I was trying to use the relationship graph as an ER diagram and

2) TO ≠ Table (I just couldn't get this without Harris' brilliant explanation) and

3) I had no concept of the Table Occurence Group.

Thank you.

Harris refers to common FMP nomenclature among developers. Is there a definitive site for that?

[Søren Dyhr]

Harris refers to common FMP nomenclature among developers. Is there a definitive site for that?

There's a whitepaper:

http://www.filemaker.com/downloads/pdf/FMDev_ConvNov05.pdf

--sd