Re: Do Data Models Need to built on a Mathematical Concept?

"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message news:<1eSra.148357$Si4.121419_at_rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...

> > I can imagine data exchange using a binary Tutorial D version.
>
> Hmmm. I don't recall that Tutorial D has much to say about data exchange
> or formatting.

No, but It would be better than XML for that.

> But I perhaps you mean D-style (vs. SQL-style) tables?
> That's what I was suggesting.

I mean relational style vs. XML hierarchical style.

> > A standardised catalog would be a good thing, but I don't see the need.
> >
> > Can you elaborate?
>
> If we are to have stardardized interchange, we have to be able to exchange
> semantic data (schema) as well as the base data.

But we don't need a standard catalog, only a standard DDL.

> For example, if I ship you
> some tables, you might want to manipulate them and send them back.
> If that happens, you'd probably like to be able to do some validation on
> your side before sending them. You can't do that unless you know
> the domains, the foreign keys, the constraints, etc.

And we can declare all of that with the DDL.

Regards
  Alfredo Received on Sat May 03 2003 - 19:32:21 CEST