Okay, that's what I figured, but wanted to make sure, because you had
listed it as a field in your brainstorm message. I've modified the
proposal accordingly.

On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Mike Mintz wrote:

> [Mike Mintz][1] commented on [Project Model Proposal][2]
> Comment title: [Re: list of dependencies][3]
>
> * * *
>
> You would need a new relationship type called TaskDependency, with two
> fields: dependent (the thing that is waiting on the other task before
> it can even get started), and requirement. I'm not attached to these
> names, but that's the general idea of how to do many-to-many
> relationships.
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Todd Davies <davies@stanford.edu>; wrote:
>> Todd Davies commented on Project Model Proposal
>> Comment title: list of dependencies
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> This was Mike's idea, but I know we can't have a list as a filler of a
>> field. Mike, how did you propose to represent dependencies between tasks?
>
>
> [1]: http://deme.stanford.edu/viewing/person/7
> [2]: http://deme.stanford.edu/viewing/htmldocument/207
> [3]: http://deme.stanford.edu/viewing/textcomment/243
>
>