Re: A Normalization Question

"Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4b45d3ad.0407081107.700a9113_at_posting.google.com...
> > You have failed to show that they represent the *same* fact.
>
> You have *failed* to define what is a fact?
>
> However, regardless of whether the string 'brown' is categorized as a
> fact or not by your definition, they still represent the same thing,
> the string 'brown'. Having three things that represent the same thing
> in one db is redundant. While the role that each string 'brown' plays
> is different (first unsystematically refers a person, second to a
> color, third to a street) the three strings themselves represent the
> same thing, the string 'brown'. This is redundant. A thing and the
> string which names it are two separate things. Below is approximately
> how XDb1 normalizes the three strings.
>
> Thing Person Color Street
> 1 ->2 ->3 ->4
>
> Person Name
> 2 ->5
>
> Color Name
> 3 ->5
>
> Street Name
> 4 ->5
>
> String Sym1 Sym2 Sym3 Sym4 Sym5 ....
> 5 ->6, ->7, ->8, ->9, ->10
>
> Symbol
> 6 b
> 7 r
> 8 o
> 9 w
> 10 n
>
> Note, there are no tables in XDb1, only things. However certain groups
> of things can be considered a list, tree, table, matrix, etc.

You will need an infinite number of monkeys to key in all the possible "things" you will need to store one time. I can't wait till you need to write a report using the jibberish you've stored. Received on Thu Jul 08 2004 - 21:56:03 CEST