Re: Database-valued attributes?

"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message news:GLadnaU5LYVh0i-iRVn-tg_at_golden.net...
> "Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message
> news:bot3ev$oqa$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> > "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
> > news:EZKdnUmgA62gjiyiRVn-tw_at_golden.net...
> > > > poss rep with more than 1 component a tuple of those components, or
a
> > > list, a set, an array or just 'a thing with components'?
> > >
> > > It is a possible representation. The remainder is internal.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Can't say I'm happy with such dereliction of definition though. I'd like
> to
> > see the logical model cover such matters rather than leaving it to be an
> > 'internal' matter. Oh well.
>
> Physical independence is not a dereliction.

One of us in the group said

"I doubt Dijkstra would consider a division between applications and data management appropriate. I know he expressed skepticism regarding the division into conceptual, logical and physical."

Has anyone got the quote? I think I share some of his skepticism...

Regards
Paul Vernon
Business Intelligence, IBM Global Services Received on Wed Nov 12 2003 - 18:09:29 CET