Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 16:10:34 -0500
"x" <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:40cd9175$1_at_post.usenet.com...
> **** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
> "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message
> > "x" <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > **** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
> > > "Anthony W. Youngman" <wol_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:C033GQQQL7xAFwgd_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk...
> > >
> > > > So if I put my data into an MV database I can access it as if it
> > > > an RDBMS. However, the converse is not true.
> > >
> > > So all data in a MV database can be represented in relational model,
> > > but not all data in a RDBMS can be represented in MV model :-)
> > >
> > > Which one is more expressive ? :-)
> > Easy question --
> It was a joke, not a question :-)
and you know I could see the rhetorical nature of the question, right?
> It shows what we get when playing with words and mixing issues.
> Codd in 1979 ACM paper said:
> Actually, the task of capturing the meaning of data is a never-ending one.
> With regard to meaning, two complementary quests are evident:
> (1) What constitutes an atomic fact (atomic semantics)?
> (2) What larger clusters of information constitute meaningful units
> (molecular semantics)?
> I think your quest is (2)
yes. smiles. --dawn Received on Mon Jun 14 2004 - 23:10:34 CEST