I love this discussion.
I am glad you feel that way. It is obviously fun for the rest of us, as well. The database is where it's at. Applications come and go but the data model seldom changes -- or at least not much.
One more thing, then, I need to do "real" work. Torkil, please add your name to the model. I am not suggesting this so that you are claiming your work (which you should do) but more because down the road, there might be questions and knowing who did the reverse engineering and doc will be helpful. You can make it clear you did not design the database but that you documented it and on what date; what version.
Programmer's "sign" their programs, User's Guide folks have their names listed, ... you get the idea.
OK - THANKS AGAIN! You are now a Joomla! superstar. Before, today, I don't know what you were.
@Scribe - lol - I conceded the point on the aliases. He's right! < But, as long as you guys don't review *my* code at home, I will secretly continue with my very naughty habit. I don't smoke anymore. I drink very infrequently. But, dammit. I am using "a" and "b" when noone is looking. >
Reverse engineering tools (or ones that are any good) should document the FK constraint if it is in the DDL or the DB implementation.
I agree that the PK and FK should match - BUT Torkil is not designing a database, but documenting it. So, his design must reflect reality. And, I am pretty sure if Torkil approached Johan right now with a clean list of data elements (i.e., full words, underscores, like named columns) and suggested we run with it for v 1.5 --- well, I think that might be the last we'd see of Torkil!)
45 in September. Both my age and the number of years I have worked with databases, or so it seems!
--> Good discussion guys! THANKS!