Re: A Normalization Question

"Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4b45d3ad.0407151048.25ed395a_at_posting.google.com...
> > Brown is a string" is a true proposition.
> > "Brown" is just a string, IOW,
>
> I contend 'brown' is a fact. I think you will agree that 'brown is
> sequentially composed of b, r, o, w, n ' is a fact or true
> proposition.

Yes.

The reason 'brown' is a fact is because it is equivalent
> to 'brown is sequentially composed of b, r, o, w, n '.

No, it isn't.

>
> RM can't determine 'brown' is a fact until, it is represented
> according to a special arrangement in attribute values of tuples.
>
> You can't determine 'brown' is a fact until, it is represented
> according to a special arrangement called a sentence.
>
> Both you and RM have limited definitions/rules.

Yes, so what? The limitations don't restrict my ability to do what is needed.

>
> > This gets back to what everyone else understands:
> > Normalization takes place in a meaningful (E.g., business) context.
>
> The above is vague because of the word "meaningful". Meaningful to
> whom? Something may be meaningful for one while not for another.
> Somethings are meaninful one day and not the next. The most general
> level of normalization takes place at the level of things, not tuples,
> attributes, values, lists, bags, tree, relations, etc.

A spurious argument, and confusing the logical with the physical again.

>
> > It is not about bits, bytes, strings, or physical storage.
>
> While physical things can probably be normalized at the hardware
> layer, I am not talking about normalizing anything at the hardware
> layer when I normalize symbols and strings represented at at the
> logical layer. RM is a logical model. Implementation of it attempt to
> keep users in the logical layer. Data entered in Sql Server or Oracle
> is at the logical layer, and that includes symbols and strings.

The user enters data at the logical. The RDBMS stores it in symbols and strings physically.

 Why do
> you keep insisting that RM's implementations are allowing user to
> enter non-logical data?

I don't.

Please explain how to determine which layer
> user-entered data in a RM db belongs to?

See above.

>
> Bits, bytes and strings can be represented at a logical layer, however
> they are not required at the hardware layer. For example, the human
> brain represents them without having them at the hardware layer.

But a computer and a brain are not the same thing and do not work the same way. Any attempt to make an equal comparison is lunacy. It's like comparing appleas and oranges, or inanimate objects and humans

If
> one looks in the logical layer of an XDb1 db, one will not find bits,
> bytes or integers unless a user chooses to represent them.
Received on Thu Jul 15 2004 - 22:46:30 CEST