|
|
Abstract:This paper discusses the various types of Entity
Relationship based diagrams, which may be encountered. It concentrates on those
based on the work of Chen. It is intended to provide guidance to those who are
unfamiliar with reading Entity Relationship based diagrams (E.R.Ds). It should
not be used as a standard for the preparation of E.R.D.s. It should also not be
considered as comprehensive of all possible styles. Background:In the 1960s, NASA was busy building highly
complex, massive programs. At the same time, many large organizations were busy
building highly complex, massive data storage based systems. As a result of the
experiences of NASA and similar organizations, structured methodologies of
design and building systems using a process oriented view developed throughout
the late 1960s and 1970s. At the same time, as a result of the experiences in
the commercial market, structured methodologies of design and building systems
using a data oriented view developed throughout the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. The
methodologies for data oriented design tended to be somewhat lagging those of
process oriented design. During the 1980s and 1990s, the two began to merge with
the rise of Object Oriented Design techniques. However, process oriented design
experienced a resurgence as a result of the ERP and ISO 9000/QM undertakings of
the 1990s. At the same time data oriented design experienced a resurgence with
the emergence of OO languages primarily on the PC. Data oriented design techniques are generally most
effective when used in a computer focused situation (i.e. to document a
database) or to document the environment. The Elements:Overview: A typical Entity Relationship Diagram (E.R.D.)
consists of two parts:
Each of these elements may (or may not) have
several other parts associated with them. An example of a simple entity diagram is shown in
figure 1. The example is of a fairly complex HR department in
which the employees are subject to and must be trained in certain legislation. There are, however, many variations in the
diagramming style used. It is helpful if the architect has provided a key to the
diagramming style either on the diagram or in a standard manual.
Entities:An
entity is any person, thing or element (also known as an object) with which the
organization interacts or has a relationship to. Examples of some standard
entities are Suppliers, Employees, Inventory Items, and Shareholders. Normally,
entities represent classes of entities (e.g. Suppliers) rather than individual
entities (e.g. Sears, Eaton’s, The Bay). An entity is represented by a rectangular box with
certain information placed around or within it. See Figure 2 for the example
used in the following discussion. Notice that the box is named. That is, there is a
name typed within the box. This is the name of the entity. Notice that there is another name typed outside the
box, at a point at which a line would normally enter the box. This is an access
path to the entity. An access path is a physical concept. It corresponds to an
index, that is it represents a path, other than the normal one, for identifying
individual records within the file/entity. One item which is not shown but which is often
present is attributes. Attributes are the data elements which describe the
individual entity. These are also known as fields in a physical file. There are
two types of attributes, identifying (identified by being underlined) and data
(not underlined), Identifying attributes provide a method for identifying
individual entities within the group (e.g. Vendor #, Customer #, Name) and must
be unique in combination. Generally, identifying attributes cannot change. Data
attributes are pieces of data which describe but do not identify the individual
(e.g. birth date, sex, EIN, SIN). Generally, they may be changed without
affecting the identification of the individual. A special type of data attribute
is a key or relationship element. These attributes provide a path to identify
the individual in related entities. Relationships:There are several
variations on E.R.Ds. While some of the differences in style exist in the
entity, most exist in the drawing of relationships. There are three parts to a
relationship:
Generally, the description includes a verb (such as
has, consists of etc.), an indication of the direction and sometimes an
indication of selection (all are, some are). There are several variations for
describing a relationship. Among others, relationships may be described by:
Cardinality is the description of the number of
entities per related entity. In other words, given that A is related to B, for
every A record there will be X B records. The X is the cardinality. In general,
the options are:
As in the description, there are several variations
on the method of showing the cardinality. In general, they fall into one of
three categories:
Please note that in all
Figures only one half of the notation is shown. The relationship between 1 and 2
is shown (1 has x of 2). But the relationship from 2 to 1 (2 has x of 1) is not.
In each case it is referred to a 1 but is not actually notated that way. Crows foot notation
consists of the splitting of a line into an approximation of the cardinality. It
is demonstrated in figure 4. A line without symbol is used to denote an unkown
cardinality. Notice that the symbol
for more than one resembles a crows footprint which gives this style its name.
Notice also that the symbols can be combined to provide multiple variations.
However, also notice that a specific number (other than 0 or 1) cannot be
described using this method. Finally, notice that the relationships are
intuitive. Arrow notation is
similar to but simpler than Crowsfoot. This is shown in Figure 5. Notice that Arrow notation is the only version
which uses lines without a symbol to denote a value rather than unknown. In
Arrow notation unknown is described with a “?” within the line. Notice also
that arrow notation does not differentiate between 1 or more and 0 or more.
Notice also that the notation cannot show specific numbers. Numbering notation falls into one of two camps.
Entity purists place the cardinality at the variation end (1 has x of 2 will
have the x at the 2 end). This is the version that is shown in Figure 6.
However, one of the OOT techniques based on E.R.Ds. reverses that (the x would
be shown at the 1 end). While there are specific and good reasons for doing this
it does mean that the location of the cardinality should be indicated in the
key.
Notice that any cardinality can be shown. Notice
also that cardinality is not as intuitive. Note that the numbers are actually
shown on the wrong side. This is because of the difficulty of drawing it using
Word Picture (a common problem in documenting). Copyright © 1998/1999/2000 Glen
Ford and Can Da Software div of 1112993 Ontario Inc - all rights reserved. To discuss this model write to Glen Ford
![]() |
Send mail to webmaster@can-da.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
|