Re: which softeware can create database?

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:33:17 -0500
Message-ID: <nakx9.131$WX1.39501964_at_radon.golden.net>


Jan,

Communication requires a transmitter and a receiver. The transmitter starts by wishing to convey something to the receiver and that "something" is meaning. If the receiver receives something other than the transmitter's meaning, the communication was imperfect. The difference between the tranmitter's meaning and the receiver's meaning is noise.

If a transmitter throws a symbol around in a forum where the symbol has a precise well-defined meaning with a longstanding history of convention without first learning what that meaning is, the transmitter contributes noise at the source and communication will only degrade from that point.

It's true that Leandro overstated his position, but I do not expect as much from him as I do from you. You are very capable of contributing far more than deconstructionist bullshit to this forum.

Having just read several threads where you have "contributed", I have discerned a pattern where you avoid giving simple useful answers to people and instead jump in to bait Leandro. Have you nothing more worthy to do with your time?

"Jan Hidders" <hidders_at_REMOVE.THIS.uia.ua.ac.be> wrote in message news:3db94e63$1_at_news.uia.ac.be...
> Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra wrote:
> >Jan.Hidders wrote:
> >> In article , Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra wrote:
> >>> Finarfin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> RDBMS
> >>>>
> >>>> Oracle, MS SQL, Access, Paradox, MySQL, PostgreSQL, SAP db, MSQL,
> >>>> etc.
> >>>
> >>> Wrong. These are SQL DBMSs. The only RDBMS in the market is
> >>> Alphora Dataphor.
> >>
> >> Indeed. The meaning of the term is determined by how people use the
> >> term and not by you.
> >
> > Wrong. Without precise meaning, there's no communication, at any
> >rate not at c.d.*theory*.

>

> There isn't? So if there is no precise meaning for the words "meaning",
> "communication" and "theory" your previous remark is meaningless in this
> group? :-D I seriously doubt it.
>

> -- Jan Hidders
>
>
>
Received on Mon Nov 04 2002 - 02:33:17 CET

Original text of this message