Re: A Normalization Question

> > Because the three strings each represent the same thing, the string
> > 'brown', it is redundant.
>
> So you keep on claiming, but the standard definition of redundancy in
> normalization theory says otherwise.

The "standard" definition of redundanty you are referring to is a limited definition most applicable to a limited data model (RM).  

> > I realize the following are unusual examples, however a general data
> > model can't (application above it can) have prejudices as to what
> > updates are unusual. Suppose, the world is taken oven by Islam and
> > they desire every string in a computer to be spelled backwards, thus
> > 'brown' needs to be updated to 'nworb'.
>
> That means the schema is changing and then all bets are off because the
> notion of update anomaly is defined only with respect to a fixed schema.

While all bet may be off in RM because anomaly only applies to fixed schema, such is not the case in my data model where even schema is considered just another thing. Received on Mon Jul 12 2004 - 19:01:31 CEST