Re: citations of nature

From: mountain man <hobbit_at_southern_seaweed.com.op>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 01:32:22 GMT
Message-ID: <G83Kb.77896$aT.48598_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au>


"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message news:Z8Cdnat3hPU0b2qiRVn-vg_at_golden.net...
> "Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message
> news:uFOJb.52423$I07.174447_at_attbi_s53...
> > "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message
> news:bt7n7f$iq5$1_at_news.netins.net...
> > >
> > > The definition I'm currently using is:
> > > Database: Retrievable data encoded on a persistent storage device
> combined
> > > with metadata - information about that data.
> >
> > I think that too much thinking these days goes into the "persistence"
> part.

>

> Sheesh! What nonsense! Compare the complex jargon above with Darwen's
> observation that "A database is a set of facts."

So what is a "fact"?
An element of data?

How might this definition deal with program objects (such as stored procedures) in the database? Received on Mon Jan 05 2004 - 02:32:22 CET

Original text of this message