Talk:MNet Roadmap
From MoodleDocs
I think the application2service table is a good idea (no more Mahara "course enrolments"!). But I don't like the idea that the URL field is in this table. Even though it varies by application, it doesn't apply to _every_ service, and therefore is redundant much of the time. Furthermore, if more services are added that need their own custom per-application fields, all of a sudden this table is getting very big with a lot of poorly related fields.
A different model that doesn't suffer the problem is this:
application2service
| Field | Datatype | Comment |
| id | integer | sequence |
| applicationid | integer | fk to mnet_application |
| serviceid | integer | fk to mnet_service |
application2service_sso
| Field | Datatype | Comment |
| id | integer | sequence |
| a2sid | integer | fk to application2service(id) |
| url | char(255) |
Nigel McNie 06:41, 22 July 2008 (CDT)
