Re: A Normalization Question

"VHarris001" <vharris001_at_aol.com> wrote in message news:20040709182107.29796.00001179_at_mb-m18.aol.com...
> >From: "D Guntermann" guntermann_at_hotmail.com
> >Date: 2004-07-09 2:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <I0LK4C.J6_at_news.boeing.com>
> >
> >
> >"VHarris001" <vharris001_at_aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20040709081455.29796.00001156_at_mb-m18.aol.com...
> >> Normalizing the data this finely might be necessary in some cases.
> >
> >What "data" are you normalizing? As a logical application data model, I
> >could see this serve as the definition for alphabets and languages which
> >would correspond to functional dependencies, but these are modeled quite
> >nicely already in other forms and methods. Do you other applications
where
> >this would be useful in mind? An example, perhaps?
> >
> >>
> >> V Harris
> >>
> >
> >- Dan
>
> One data model I always had trouble with was 'family' relationships and
related
> detail.
>
> Suppose we want to keep all contacts in a database. And for some of them
we
> also want to track their relatives, friends, dates for special events, and
> other personal information.
>
> As you know, there are many types and levels of relationships, e.g.,
> biological, legal, religious, social, etc.
>
> And while some of the relations are factual, some are only speculative.
For
> example, some parentage facts can only be represented as a probability
(e.g.,
> it was either Mr. Brown or some guy named Tom, or . . .).
>
> The table design seemed too complicated to normalize. That is when I
began to
> think that rather than make a new table for each new, unique relationship
I
> encountered, it might be easier to put all relationships in one table and
> describe them as I encountered more new, unique relationships.
>
> Also, rather than have the contact database be user-centric, it might be
nice
> to have the output centered on the individual represented by the record
being
> displayed. IOW, grandfather, father, son are three unique individuals.
When
> we highlight father, then grandfather should appear as father, and father
> should appear as self. If we highlight grandfather, grandfather should
appear
> as self, father should appear as son, and son should appear as grandson.
>
> Can we accurately model the familial dataset with RDBMS?
>
> V Harris
>

Google on "Celko Nested Set Model" Received on Sat Jul 10 2004 - 04:16:44 CEST