From: John W. Vinson on
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:17:42 -0500, "Nan" <ongshat(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>John,
>Thank you for your reply. I think I understand. Do I have this right?
>
>The main contact information would go in a Household table with a unique ID.
>This would be a contact responsible for payment and care of the student if a
>minor with mailing info.
>
>Student name would go in the student table with the householdID as a foreign
>key. If an adult is a student, their name would be entered again with a
>link to the household table as the responsible contact. In the future, this
>would enable a child of an adult student who is already in the household
>table to easily be linked back to a household main contact.
>
>I hope this makes sense, I'm typing as I think it through.

Sounds good to me! I have a church membership database which uses the same
paradigm: a Families table with address information and a "FamilyName" field
for addessing letters to the family as a whole ("Mike & Debbie Schmidt"),
linked one to many to a Members table with firstname, lastname and other
biographical data fields. It works fine and is a good analogy to what you're
doing.
--

John W. Vinson [MVP]
From: Rita Brasher on
John,
Just wanted to respond that the "household" concept was a great one!
Thanks!!
Rita

John W. Vinson wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:17:42 -0500, "Nan" <ongshat(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> John,
>> Thank you for your reply. I think I understand. Do I have this right?
>>
>> The main contact information would go in a Household table with a unique ID.
>> This would be a contact responsible for payment and care of the student if a
>> minor with mailing info.
>>
>> Student name would go in the student table with the householdID as a foreign
>> key. If an adult is a student, their name would be entered again with a
>> link to the household table as the responsible contact. In the future, this
>> would enable a child of an adult student who is already in the household
>> table to easily be linked back to a household main contact.
>>
>> I hope this makes sense, I'm typing as I think it through.
>
> Sounds good to me! I have a church membership database which uses the same
> paradigm: a Families table with address information and a "FamilyName" field
> for addessing letters to the family as a whole ("Mike & Debbie Schmidt"),
> linked one to many to a Members table with firstname, lastname and other
> biographical data fields. It works fine and is a good analogy to what you're
> doing.
From: John W. Vinson on
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:14:41 -0600, Rita Brasher <rita.brasher(a)fedex.com>
wrote:

>John,
>Just wanted to respond that the "household" concept was a great one!

As an avid contradancer myself, I'm delighted to have been of help to a dance
teacher!
--

John W. Vinson [MVP]
From: Nan on
John,
Thank you so much. I love it when I learn something new.
Nancy


"John W. Vinson" <jvinson(a)STOP_SPAM.WysardOfInfo.com> wrote in message
news:ajcjm5tgdn648qcn1g6l6ojkn475pacgru(a)4ax.com...
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:17:42 -0500, "Nan" <ongshat(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>John,
>>Thank you for your reply. I think I understand. Do I have this right?
>>
>>The main contact information would go in a Household table with a unique
>>ID.
>>This would be a contact responsible for payment and care of the student if
>>a
>>minor with mailing info.
>>
>>Student name would go in the student table with the householdID as a
>>foreign
>>key. If an adult is a student, their name would be entered again with a
>>link to the household table as the responsible contact. In the future,
>>this
>>would enable a child of an adult student who is already in the household
>>table to easily be linked back to a household main contact.
>>
>>I hope this makes sense, I'm typing as I think it through.
>
> Sounds good to me! I have a church membership database which uses the same
> paradigm: a Families table with address information and a "FamilyName"
> field
> for addessing letters to the family as a whole ("Mike & Debbie Schmidt"),
> linked one to many to a Members table with firstname, lastname and other
> biographical data fields. It works fine and is a good analogy to what
> you're
> doing.
> --
>
> John W. Vinson [MVP]


From: Nan on
Rita,
Thank you as well. I so appreciate it.
N

"Rita Brasher" <rita.brasher(a)fedex.com> wrote in message
news:OISBoXRpKHA.1552(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> John,
> Just wanted to respond that the "household" concept was a great one!
> Thanks!!
> Rita
>
> John W. Vinson wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:17:42 -0500, "Nan" <ongshat(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> John,
>>> Thank you for your reply. I think I understand. Do I have this right?
>>>
>>> The main contact information would go in a Household table with a unique
>>> ID. This would be a contact responsible for payment and care of the
>>> student if a minor with mailing info.
>>>
>>> Student name would go in the student table with the householdID as a
>>> foreign key. If an adult is a student, their name would be entered
>>> again with a link to the household table as the responsible contact. In
>>> the future, this would enable a child of an adult student who is already
>>> in the household table to easily be linked back to a household main
>>> contact.
>>>
>>> I hope this makes sense, I'm typing as I think it through.
>>
>> Sounds good to me! I have a church membership database which uses the
>> same
>> paradigm: a Families table with address information and a "FamilyName"
>> field
>> for addessing letters to the family as a whole ("Mike & Debbie Schmidt"),
>> linked one to many to a Members table with firstname, lastname and other
>> biographical data fields. It works fine and is a good analogy to what
>> you're
>> doing.