>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I am posting this in VFP forum but the backend is SQL Server database.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I want to ask your opinion on the following DB design consideration.
>>>>>>I need to create a table (which will be a child table) that will store different value, depending on the Parent PK
>>>>>>For example. Some records of the table will have 2 INT columns, 1 Bit Column, 4 Decimal columns. Other rows/records will have different number of types. And the captions to the columns (the way they will be viewed by user of the VFP app) will be different.
>>>>>>I am thinking of having a set of different type columns, as follows:
>>>>>>BIT_VAL 1 Type: Bit
>>>>>>BIT_VAL2 Type: Bit
>>>>>>BIT_VAL3 Type: Bit
>>>>>>DEC_VAL1 Type Decimal
>>>>>>DEC_VAL2 Type Decimal
>>>>>>DEC_VAL3 Type Decimal
>>>>>>DEC_VAL4 Type Decimal
>>>>>>INT_VAL1 Type INT
>>>>>>and so on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, for each different Type the table will have a max number of columns. This way, the UI will take care of Captions and matching the Captions to the Col Name/Type.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you think of this approach?
>>>>>
>>>>>This seems to be a classic example of where it would be helpful for you to tell us what you're trying to do, rather than arguing over implementation details. There may be a completely different approach that would make all this discussion so far, obsolete.
>>>>
>>>>I will put together a brief description. But I am beginning to think that what Thomas suggested, multiple tables, is the right approach.
>>>
>>>I just want to point out that I was the first to suggest multiple tables. I don't usually care about who gets credit for an idea, but this seems like a classic case of a woman suggesting something and it not being considered seriously until another man suggests the same thing.
>>>
>>>Tamar
>>
>>My initial post (at least this is how I though of it) was to avoid having multiple tables and simplify the design by putting all values in one table. My understanding was that you suggested a different approach; and if not, I would have to go to the "bad" approach of multiple tables.
>>
>>But I know it is hard to imagine for someone who was educated in America, from kindergarten to high school; who went to an Ivy League school; etc. that an immigrant for whom English is not even the second language, would misunderstand something. It seems to be the classic case of immigrants not being taken seriously.
>>Otherwise, why would I not take the words of someone, who has a PhD and wrote several books on VFP, seriously!? Of course I would rather heed the words of someone who has a penis.
>
>Dmitry - I didn't mean to offend you and I certainly wasn't questioning your understanding of English. Your language abilities impress me greatly. I don't know how long it would take me to function productively in a country that used something other than my native tongue. And you've gone on to try to master additional languages.
>
>For reasons that are likely obvious, I am a little sensitive on this issue right now (as many women are). As I've written in various places, I feel very fortunate that I fell into a development community in which there were a number of female leaders and where, except for a few rare occasions, I haven't been made uncomfortable on the basis of my sex.
>
>I've made a personal commitment to call out racism (which is totally irrelevant to this conversation) and sexism when I see them. There's a fair body of research on this issue of women's ideas being overlooked until they're repeated by a man. That's how this particular incident felt to me and I said something. If I misinterpreted, I apologize.
>
>Tamar

Tamar,
Thank you for your complement with regards to my English. I appreciate it.
As far as your apology, not a problem. I have no hard feelings. I always value your input on technical issues.
Even though God "awarded" me with the penis :), I am just as sensitive to the women's equality, fair treatment, and prevention of the sexual harassment. I have two daughters who are in the professional work and this subject is very important to me.