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

"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message news:<YbUsa.476635$Zo.106137_at_sccrnsc03>...
> > But we don't need a standard catalog, only a standard DDL.
>
> Hmmm. I guess that's true. But is having a standard DDL any better
> than having a standard catalog?

At least is more frequent.

> I observe that it's easy to model inserted rows as relational data.
> (Trivial, in fact.) But it's harder to model delete and harder still
> to model update. Maybe this is an argument for using a language
> to do it.

IMO it is a very strong argument.

> But to do it this way seems an admission of failure to me. After
> all, this is data that is *easily* represented as relations, and here
> we go, falling back on a textual representation.

We can use a binary relational language, or we can transmit the compiled canonical form relational expressions (in a p-code like format, for instance).

Regards
  Alfredo Received on Mon May 05 2003 - 12:27:17 CEST