dimensional fact model problem

Hallo!
I am unexperienced in building a DWH and I hope you can help me

At https://i.servimg.com/u/f76/18/23/84/53/unbena10.png you can see my (simple) ERM.
The tables A and B are my Dimensions. But what should I do with C?
C has a n:m relationship with B and 1:n relationship with A: a A belongs to ONE C, but a C has serveral A's. For a fact, the C joined over A is identical with the C joined over B. In other words, one fact has exactly one C! It does not matter which "way" (A or B) you use. The relationship between A and C as well as B and C are not important for me. I need A, B and C for aggregation&filtering.

Consequently my intention is to handle C as third Dimension -> "unlink" C from A and B. What do you think about it?

Originally I tried to develop the dimensional fact model using the data driven approach described by Golfarelli et. al. but I didn't find a solution for my construct. I run into the problem that it seems C is a hierarchy instead of dimension. But I think it is nonsense to add the same hierarchy to the dimensions A and B. Why does the data driven approach not working for me- what i'am doing wrong?

Do you know any literature which copes with such a construct?

Thank you!

Hi there,

To handle many to many relationships i recommend a relationship table (Bridge)

Relate C to the fact. There is only one C that would satisfy the situation for a particular fact row, correct?

Facts are held in context with its related dimensions, C being one of them. Relationships A has with C and B has with C are immaterial to the fact. If you want to track the states of relationships between A, B, and C, you use another fact (or facts).

Thank you!

If you did care about the relationships between A, B, and C, you could handle via a factless fact table.