Re: Stored fields ordered left to right

"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:bsn9kv$6vs$1_at_news.netins.net... >
> Nope -- nothing insurmountable about it. It is a matter of language.

I am sympathetic to your cause, but I am not optimistic about its chances for success. Still, nothing to lose, eh?

> Would it sit OK with relational theorists if I refer to their def of
> relation as "unordered relations" or "Codd relations"? I don't want to call
> them database relations because I'll be talking about databases that are
> using mathematical (ordered) tuples as well. I'm sure I can make something
> up,. but I don't want the language to obscure the information.

Since the current issue under discussion is how attributes are logically identified, something more like "relations with named attributes" might be useful. Probably that's too long, and "Codd relations" will have to do, though.

Maybe it is useful to consider this from the standpoint of the tuple?

Marshall Received on Sun Dec 28 2003 - 23:30:02 CET