Re: citations of nature

From: Adrian Kubala <adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:24:49 -0600
Message-ID: <slrnbvm9t1.b6u.adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net>


mountain man <hobbit_at_southern_seaweed.com.op> schrieb:
> "Adrian Kubala" <adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnbve5k2.ta3.adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net...

>> mountain man <hobbit_at_southern_seaweed.com.op> schrieb:
>> > Do primitive databases exist in nature in some form?  If so, in what
>> > form(s)?
>>
>> Unless you're talking about the relational model in particular, I think
>> that whether something is a database or not is purely subjective --

> There are no general distinguishing features of databases by which
> they might be discerned?

I don't believe that databasese have any general distinguishing features in and of themselves -- calling something a database describes how it functions in a context.

> And why do you make exception of the relational model? Is it supposed
> to be more objective?

I meant that my point applies to the general concept of "database" and I wasn't going to comment on whether the relational model has application in nature. Though I think it does, but as an abstract way of describing nature (as logic/mathematics), not as something you'd observe in nature. Received on Tue Jan 06 2004 - 22:24:49 CET

Original text of this message