Re: foundations of relational theory?

"Lauri Pietarinen" <lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com> wrote in message news:bnhl7d$isi$1_at_nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
>
>
> Bob Badour wrote:
>
> >"Lauri Pietarinen" <lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com> wrote in message
> >news:bnh5m7$7ij$1_at_nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> >
> >
> >>Bob Badour wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>While I have observed the phenomenon of application developers looking
at
> >>>data management as foreign, I have not observed the converse. The
> >>>
> >>>
> >relational
> >
> >
> >>>answer to mismatch is to increase the level of abstraction of the
> >>>application development environment to the level of the dbms.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Not true. See this quote from Date:
> >>
> >>“A quick and admittedly not very scientific survey of a whole shelf load
> >>of database textbooks--37 in all, to be exact, including essentially all
> >>of the best-known ones--reveals the following:
> >>· Only one book had an entire chapter devoted to the topic of integrity
> >>(and even there I had severe reservations about the quality of the
> >>treatment).
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I don't see how the quoted text is relevant to the issue of whether
database
> >managers look at application development as foreign. Am I just being
dense?
> >
> OK, what I meant was that the db text books don't talk about integrity
> (as much as they should) and hence:
>
> 1) db-researches to not consider it an important topic
> 2) users do not realise it is important (to the extent that they should)
and
> 3) DBMS-vendors do not implement integrity features (to the extent that
> they could)

You will get no argument from me on those three points. Received on Mon Oct 27 2003 - 00:38:17 CET