Re: object algebra
From: Marshall Spight <mspight_at_dnai.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 04:38:07 GMT
Message-ID: <PWU%b.137246$uV3.666024_at_attbi_s51>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 04:38:07 GMT
Message-ID: <PWU%b.137246$uV3.666024_at_attbi_s51>
"Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4b45d3ad.0402271624.4d0fac07_at_posting.google.com...
> > > When/if you are able to implement www.xdb1.com/Example/Ex076.asp you
> > > will begin to see that pattern arising.
> >
> > Already did; didn't have problems; didn't use nulls.
>
> Nor normalization. If I extend your methodology, it would be even
> better to use a word processor (which has a scope, but not here).
>
> Are you advocating representing things in an unnormalized manner?
We both agree (as near as I can tell) that normalization is a good thing. We just haven't reached a common definition of normalization. I still don't understand your use of the term.
Marshall Received on Sat Feb 28 2004 - 05:38:07 CET