Re: Where to discuss relational modelling?
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 02:06:46 GMT
Message-ID: <WOQvc.20195$hB2.12167_at_nwrdny03.gnilink.net>
There really should be some additional groups, and you have a good point about "relational" being in the title. I never really thought about it not being there now. Here's one that we really do need, though:
comp.databases.argument.clinic
"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message
news:c9o80q$2rs$1_at_news.netins.net...
> "Gianluca Hotz" <ghotz_at_alphasys.it> wrote in message
> news:2i9il0Fl0nfaU1_at_uni-berlin.de...
> > > Alan,
> > > This forum does perform a useful function.
> > > It's the leisure of the theory class.
> > > But comp.databases.design would perform a different but also useful
> > > function.
> > > The thing is, I have no idea how one starts a newsgroup. Anybody
else?
> >
> > Hi Laconic2,
> > I was just trying to catch up with all the posts and
> > saw this one, you can get more information about starting
> > a new newsgroup here: http://www.uvv.org (there are a couple
> > of pointers to specific articles).
> >
> > OTH I agree with Costin and would prefer to see
> > such discussion in this newsgroup.
>
> I agree that I think that there is room for many people with different
> interests discussing in different threads. I can tell quite soon whether
a
> thread is of interest to me or not, as I'm sure others can.
>
> If you do want to start a newsgroup on relational design, then it should
> have the word "relational" in it. I have been accused of being a troll
here
> when I question relational theory, while this is not stated as a
relational
> theory group. I have an interest in database design as much as database
> theory, but would surely stick to relational design if that were the name
of
> the group. For folks interested in all things relational, perhaps
> comp.databases.relational would be good. Just a thought. --dawn
>
>
Received on Fri Jun 04 2004 - 04:06:46 CEST