Re: A Normalization Question

"Larry Coon" <lcnospam_at_assist.org> wrote in message news:40EDC141.3A58_at_assist.org...
> Neo wrote:
>
> > I realize the following are extraordinary examples, however a general
> > data model can't (application above it can) have prejudices as to what
> > data/changes it will accept. Suppose, the world is taken oven by
> > islamic terrorist. As part of their spoils, they want every word in
> > every computer to be spelled backwards, thus 'brown' needs to be
> > update to 'nworb'. Or suppose, the French, take over and want every
> > string to end in a silent t. In the above tuple, updating one and not
> > the others, corrupts the db. Below is approximately how XDb1
> > normalizes the three strings and updating it from 'brown' to 'nworb'
> > or appending the symbol t does not corrupt the db.
>
> Oh yes, it does, in exactly the same way the relational
> model suffers from this, uh, "problem." Suppose a database
> contains two "browns" and one "green." Given your requirement,
> It is just as much a "corruption" to change both browns and
> miss the green as it is to change one brown but not the other.
> Therefore, tokenizing each individual string does nothing to
> solve your "problem" here.

Not to mention the multiple instances of "n" and "r".

>
>
> Larry Coon
> University of California
Received on Fri Jul 09 2004 - 00:18:26 CEST