Re: c.d.theory glossary - RELATION
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 17:58:12 +0200
Message-ID: <4092779f$0$562$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
>
> fact: John likes Mary.
> Which proposition represents John ?
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 17:58:12 +0200
Message-ID: <4092779f$0$562$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
x wrote:
> mAsterdam wrote:
>>x wrote:
[snip]
> If the facts tell nothing about things in the world,
> then a relational database would be worthless (empty) :-)
:-)
>>>If yes, those _things_ are explicitly or implicitly represented >>>in relational model ? And by what ? Why not otherwise. >> >>Assuming yes about the first question: >>'represent' would be 'explicit', imho. >>By what? By the propositions (by means of the predicates). >> >>As I said: just thinking out loud.
>
>
> fact: John likes Mary.
> Which proposition represents John ?
The proposition "John likes Mary" represents John. Indirectly, but explicitly. Like so:
A representation would be:
+----------------------------------------+ |Likes: | | The person identified by Person1 likes | | the person identified by Person2 | +--------------------+-------------------+| Person1:PersonName |Person2:PersonName |
+====================+===================+ | John | Mary | +--------------------|-------------------+
While we're at it:
An ER-model would have one box "Person", with a
recursive m:n association 'likes/is liked by'.
Are you sure he likes her? Received on Fri Apr 30 2004 - 17:58:12 CEST