Re: Data Display & Modeling

From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 13:01:27 +0200
Message-ID: <409e0f8b$0$564$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>

Laconic2 wrote:

> I would strongly argue (and this is from the trenches) that problem of less
> than full adherence to the relational model is not the largest problem in
> the practical world of what you might call SQL databases. (I'm still
> looking for another term. How about "tabular databases"?).

Sounds ok to me. Would relation valued attributes fit into that? I think so. Would compound attributes fit in a tabular database? ISTM fixed visible structures would, but lists would not. What is your take on this?

> Most of the
> trash databases I have seen resulted from the actions of database designers
> with almost no formal training in db design, and much of that training ill
> directed.

[snip excellent list]

> In short, the programming language BASIC made it so simple that any idiot
> could write a program. And SQL did the same thing for creating databases.
> And that's what happened!

:-) Received on Sun May 09 2004 - 06:01:27 CDT