Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Date's First Great Blunder

Re: Date's First Great Blunder

From: Dawn M. Wolthuis <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:59:02 -0500
Message-ID: <c5k8mo$umd$1@news.netins.net>


"Eric Kaun" <ekaun_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:xZgfc.268$Ha4.262_at_newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
> "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message
> news:c5jopp$hdq$1_at_news.netins.net...
> > There is not
> > one correct mathematical model for data, metadata, nor functions (by
> > whatever names).
>
> "Correct"? Is that even possible?

Nope, unless you think it is possible to have a correct metaphor.

> > > Many people confuse a class with its definition.
> >
> > Me, for exampe. The term is used both ways. I prefer to think of a
class
> > as a specification for (that is, metadata regarding) a domain/type.
What
> we
> > can "see" of the class is a specification "in writing" (e.g.
MyType.java)
> > and a compiled version of that spec (e.g. MyType.class). The set of
> objects
> > that could be instantiated by way of this specification of the type is
> more
> > abstract. So, I prefer using the term "class" as a definition/spec of a
> > type and the term "type" as the more abstract (invisible) set. I think
> this
> > helps avoid some of the confusion in terms, perhaps, maybe, a little
bit.
>
> So a class is simply an implementation of a type? That seems to be what
> you're getting at.

"Type" is not my favorite word, but if, indeed, it is the very same word as "domain" then it seems to me that a class is the specification of a domain. The class itself is not the domain "set" but, rather, an object of software that specifies the domain. I suppose that one could equate a specification with a set and surely there is a mapping (a function) from the spec to the domain.

> > > No, code does not have any relationship with metadata.
> >
> > really? What about the declarative code that specifies constraints on
the
> > data -- is that metadata? If the same information is in a procedural
> > language, does it cease to be metadata at that point?
>
> Yes, I'd say so. The line between "procedural" and "declarative" may be
> somewhat hard to define (at least I haven't seen a formal definition),
> though most of us would know either to see it.

What gives "declarative" a description of metadata that OO or functional or procedural or whatever other languages would not be able to claim? --dawn Received on Wed Apr 14 2004 - 15:59:02 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US