>>>>>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