d has probably
been organized by the GIS community, but that's
another technology to learn about.
> Osvaldo Sommer
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Blomstrom
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE
David Blomstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Getting Oriented: Political versus Ecological Geography
Hm... I think you were an even bigger help than I
anticipated! If I understand correctly, I need to fix
the tables I
--- Peter Brawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> David,
>
> If one finds oneself thinking about creating large
> numbers of columns for
> particular features, the working model is likely not
> general enough (eg why
> not a child table that permits you to add any number
> of features you please
> f
t;
>
> This way you can define the characteristics 1 time
> and assign to a
> country as many or as few as you need.
>
> You may want to use innob tables to create the
> foreing key and to help
> them inforce them.
>
> Hope this is usefull
>
> Osvaldo
the foreing key and to help
them inforce them.
Hope this is usefull
Osvaldo Sommer
-Original Message-
From: David Blomstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2004 5:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Getting Oriented: Political versus Ecological Geography
--- Peter
--- Peter Brawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >In the states table, should I list Colorado's
> regions
> >in three cells... Great Plains | Rocky Mountains |
> >Colorado Plateau, or group them in one cell, like
> >this:
>
> >Colorado | state | grasslands, Rocky Mountains,
> >Colorado Plateau | co
>In the states table, should I list Colorado's regions
>in three cells... Great Plains | Rocky Mountains |
>Colorado Plateau, or group them in one cell, like
>this:
>Colorado | state | grasslands, Rocky Mountains,
>Colorado Plateau | co | cna | 5
>It gets even trickier, because I may link Colora
