Randy Kramer wrote:

>On Monday 12 September 2005 04:11 pm, Jamey Cribbs wrote:
>  
>
>>>If one-to-many links are not symmetrical, that's the best reason
>>>of all I'll never use them.
>>>      
>>>
>
>There are (some) other people paying (some) attention.
>
>In a traditional relational database system, what goes in can come out, and 
>I'm not sure that anyting different is being proposed here (but I may be 
>confused).
>
>Aside: One-to-many links are inherently not symmetrical, and I don't know what 
>is meant by storing something in the "one-to-many" link.  
>
>The one to many link is typically accomplished by keys.  If a one to many link 
>exists, it is because a record in on table contains a key (to indicate 
>linking) to another table wherein multiple records with the same key are 
>allowed.  Hence you have a record in one table that relates to (or can relate 
>to) multiple records in the other table.
>
>Is there something different going on in KirbyBase?
>  
>
Nope.  That's pretty much how it works in KirbyBase.

Jamey