No, not that kind of party...
I am having discussions with our team regarding whether 'Party' is a viable Hub topic in Data Vault. I read a past post from Roelant Vos which makes what I feel is a valid argument against such a structure. I.e., if you tag your various entities as 'Party', it suggests you do not have an appropriate level of understanding of the entities.
I see two ways to model 'Party' for Data Vault.
1) A 'Same as Link'. In this case, the source data comes from two distinct source systems, with different keys. Each key would have an entry in the Hub, with it's own source-system specific satellite, and a SAL table would tie the multiple entries together.
2) This scenario could have the same source systems with distinct keys, or could come from a Party Master, which would have a single key for a Party, and some way of indicating what 'types' of entity the Party represents. Each Party 'type' would have a separate Hub, and a Link table to tie them together.
3) I do not think that a Party Hub is appropriate for the second scenario where one tuple in a Party Master needs to represent multiple Party 'types' in the Data Vault Hub, as this would necessitate some sort of sub-set of the primary key on each row.
So, is a 'Party' Hub appropriate? If not, how would you model 'Party'?