| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: FOL/HOL: is there a middle ground?
"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message news:<ZqIKc.113980$MB3.14356_at_attbi_s04>...
> > Actually, all I want is relation-valued attributes and list-valued > attributes.
I can understand why you'd want list-valued attributes. Speaking as a logic programmer, it's not clear to me why modern DBMS don't come with strong, expressive, statically checked type systems for attributes. For instance, being able to define a `maybe' type would solve all those problems with NULLs right off the bat.
But I still don't understand *why* you'd want relation-valued attributes if you're going to restrict yourself to finite relations. Surely you could get most of that functionality using names. For example:
binop A B AopB
 |
 |