Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?

In message <40a4beee$1_at_post.usenet.com>, x <x-false_at_yahoo.com> writes
>> Now, it is a nice thing to be smart. But remember it is not
>> everyday we face situations where Relativity is relevant and usable in
>> the real world... in everyday life Newtonian physics are quite useful,
>> and unless you are in some limit situation relevant -- and much
>> simpler than The Real Thing.
>
>Anthony said because we work with data, we should know what data is.
>He would want an answer to his question: "But what the heck IS data ?"
>Of course this is a trivial question for you :-)
>I remember Fabian Pascal started one of his seminars with several such
>"trivial" questions.
>
>Why you have not answered the question ?

Thanks, X.

I take it Leandro is parading his ignorance, rather than seeking enlightenment.

But I'll try to enlighten him, anyway. We now know that mass as it really is, and mass as it is defined in Newton's model, aren't quite the same thing. Therefore, as Leandro says, we know that Newtonian Mechanics, for the most part, works, and we also know where it doesn't work.

But *I* don't know what "data" is "as it really is", and from the answers I've got so far I don't think anybody else does. The best definition so far is for data as it is defined in the relational model (and that's pretty much the only proper definition anybody's tried to give).

And if we haven't got a philosophical definition, we can't compare the philosophical and theoretical definitions, and therefore we haven't got a clue as to whether either "the relational model mostly works", or (and this is important) where its limitations are and where it breaks down.

Cheers,
Wol

-- 
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
HEX wondered how much he should tell the Wizards. He felt it would not be a
good idea to burden them with too much input. Hex always thought of his reports
as Lies-to-People.
The Science of Discworld : (c) Terry Pratchett 1999