Authoritative References
From: Laconic2 <laconic2_at_comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:37:27 -0400
Message-ID: <sPKdnSwJ0KOMN8vcRVn-iw_at_comcast.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:37:27 -0400
Message-ID: <sPKdnSwJ0KOMN8vcRVn-iw_at_comcast.com>
"Alfredo Novoa" <alfredo_at_ncs.es> wrote in message
news:e4330f45.0409251500.4f1b8afa_at_posting.google.com...
> My obvious sugestion is that we should resort to the authoritative
> references:
>
> http://www.nist.gov/dads/HTML/abstractDataType.html
>
I have to wonder just how "authoritative" the NIST dictionary is. This,
even though the "nation" referred to is probably my own.
Here's an example: I went to that dictionary and looked up several words.
Here's their definition of "relational structure"
http://www.nist.gov/dads/HTML/relational.html
I have to wonder how much acceptance this definition would get in this
forum.
They don't even have a definition of "data model". Received on Sun Sep 26 2004 - 13:37:27 CEST