Re: object algebra

"Eric Kaun" <ekaun_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:9Dq%b.50097$HS2.38249_at_newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> "Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4b45d3ad.0402242033.18b3f32f_at_posting.google.com...
> > > True enough - it's just so commonly used as a slam against relational,
> as if
> > > it's not "multi-dimensional" enough, that it disturbs me when I see
it.
> > > Somehow the fact that reality is messy bleeds into assumptions that
our
> code
> > > and/or data have to be messy too, which is just giving up (and
> professional
> > > malpractice besides).
> >
> > Why not prove those people wrong by providing a clean (NULL-less)
> > solution to the example shown at www.xdb1.com/Example/Ex076.asp ?
>
> Prove what wrong? Exactly what problem are you trying to solve? I get the
> silly idea that a set of relations THING, INSTANCE, and RELATIONSHIP with
> some fairly generic attributes would do the trick. But again: you've said
> nothing about the problem. That page says nothing about the problem or the
> domain. It's bizarre, to say the least - have you come across a use for
this
> in real business problems?
>
> At best, it seems like some sort of thought-sketchpad.

Eric, you are wasting your time. Neo combines stupidity and ignorance with free association. The most polite thing anyone can say about Neo is he is random. Received on Thu Feb 26 2004 - 19:13:07 CET