Re: SQL for Modelling Generalization Hierarchy

From: Dawn M. Wolthuis <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 16:22:32 -0500
Message-ID: <c9auv7$dbf$1_at_news.netins.net>


"mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message news:40b8faae$0$563$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
> Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
>
> > mAsterdam wrote:
> >>Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> >>
> >>>x wrote:
> >>>>mAsterdam wrote:
> >>
> >>[snip]
> >>
> >>>>If it is so frequent, maybe there is some standard solution to it.
> >>>>It would be interesting to see why the solution is not obvious.
> >>>>Is it the fault of the Relational Model, of SQL
> >>>>or of the people involved ?
> >>>
> >>>yes, yes, no.
> >>
> >>no, no, maybe.
> >>
> >>:-)
> >
> >
> > I'm feeling a disconnect with you, mAster. Dam!
>
> :-(
>
> Maybe we can connect again later.
>
> There is at least one track we join: educating
> "relational" or "object oriented" as the ultimate
> truth in database cq. software development is highly
> damaging, both intellectually and economically.
>
> Friends again? ;-)

Ja, goed -- that holds for the pointer information too (and sorry for the typo). Cheers! --dawn Received on Sat May 29 2004 - 23:22:32 CEST

Original text of this message