|WikiProject Databases / Computer science|
Diagram needs a legend
Very nice article, however, the included graphic is in desperate need of a legend.
As someone who does not know Anchor Modeling, but is very eager to extend their DB theory and practice, I find myself confounded by this one simple thing. When I look at the diagram, I cannot readily tell what is an Anchor, Knot, Tie, or an Attribute, and thus I cannot relate the descriptions and examples in the text of the article to their visual form. I know that the text preceding the diagram tries to address this, but it's not succeeding. So please make it easy for us to figure this out: add a graphical map showing what visual object types correspond to the textual names of those object types. I.E., a legend. RBarryYoung (talk) 19:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- Let me also add that although referencing Entity-Relationship modeling is fine, relying on the reader to be conversant in it in order to understand the immediate diagram is not. Worse, the visual conventions of ER-diagramming have been far more diverse and inconsistent over the last 30 years than most advocates are willingly to admit. So even though I have a passing familiarity with basic Chen ER-diagramming, I still cannot tell if that was the ER style that Anchor Modeling "resembles", nor what parts of it apply to Anchor Modeling diagrams. In particular I am not sure what the lines between the elements are supposed to mean, nor what a line with an open circle in the middle, or a closed circle or no circle is supposed to distinguish. So the lines also should be explained somewhere. RBarryYoung (talk) 20:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC)