![]() wq is not a form-builder per se, but that shouldn't prevent you from using it to make one! Essentially, you can design applications that allow project participants to define their own data collection requirements via an intuitive web-based interface. One particular strength of an EAV approach is the ability to create "form-builder" or "campaign" driven applications. Perhaps unsurprisingly, wq supports both approaches out of the box, though the framework has traditionally had better support for the EAV-style approach (which is important for water quality monitoring). This means that an EAV schema can be administered via a web-based interface, while a relational schema typically needs to be modified by a database administrator. At a high level, attributes are added as columns to a relational schema, but as rows in an EAV schema. The key difference in the two approaches is the level of flexibility your model has in adapting to changing project requirements, especially when new attribute definitions are needed. ![]() This article exists to describe one key decision you will need to make - whether to use a traditional relational model, or to use an Entity-Attribute-Value (EAV) model (also commonly referred to as an open schema). wq does provide a number of common design patterns we've found useful, but these are not required, and in some cases should be avoided. Your project needs and topic domain will determine what data model is best for your application. This step is so important, in fact, that wq does not do it for you. ![]() Once you've installed wq, you are now ready for the most important step when building an app for citizen science: defining your data model. To EAV, or not to EAV? Choosing your data model
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |