Re: foundations of relational theory?

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 06:28:56 -0800
Message-ID: <cd3b3cf.0310290628.5bedfc6e_at_posting.google.com>


Lauri Pietarinen <lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com> wrote in message news:<bnmkv8$f9j$1_at_nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>...
> Marshall Spight wrote:
>
> >"cmurthi" <xyzcmurthi_at_quest.with.a.w.net> wrote in message news:3F9E7BFE.7050400_at_quest.with.a.w.net...
> >
> >
> >>Perhaps
> >>this can evolve to a discussion of priorities and strategies in
> >>application development instead of purely theoretical niceties.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I'm interested in practicalities, but I'm also interested in
> >theory. The big reason I read c.d.t. is to further my interest
> >in theory. When I'm at work, I'm Mr. Practical. When I'm
> >home, reading newsgroups, I put my theory hat on. So
> >I actually have a *cultural* bias against discussing practicalities
> >while here. (Plus, I already get a steady diet of that.)
> >
> >Of course, the weird thing about crossposting is that "here"
> >and "there" are the same place. This post goes to both, but
> >I'm only subscribed to one. To me and other cdters, this
> >is home base; to the cdpers, same thing. This kind of
> >breaks a basic human interaction mechanism, which is
> >that you be extra-polite when you're in someone else's
> >home. We're each in the others' living room.
> >
> >I'm not sure who first brough c.d.t. and c.d.p. together; it
> >was perhaps not the best fit of cultures!
> >
>
> I think this interaction has brought up many interesting and important
> aspects. The reason
> I am interested in theory is that it will make my practice better. I
> don't believe in theory
> for theorys sake. Through out history the best theorists have also
> excelled in practice
> (I am thinking of Aristoteles, Newton, Gauss). The most interesting
> things come about
> where theory meets practice. Even Codd in his work was very oriented
> towards practice.
> For example there is no theoretical reason for mandating that columns
> have names and no order.
> The reason for this is to make the database more *practical*.

As a matter of fact, Codd's original work used ordered columns. Received on Wed Oct 29 2003 - 15:28:56 CET

Original text of this message