Re: pre-FAQ
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:36:01 GMT
Message-ID: <lxO5d.118118$MQ5.95552_at_attbi_s52>
"mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message news:4157acd6$0$48933$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
> >
> > Q: Is this group related only to relational database theory?
> > A: No.
>
> Agreed.
I think this could be rephrased to better emphasise the point Dawn wants to make; (I think we've had one misunderstanding already.)
Q: Is the only kind of database theory discussed here the relational kind? N: Although relational tends to get most of the ink, discussions of other kinds of theory are also on-topic.
> > Q: What do we mean by "database"?
I don't think you're going to improve on "a database is a collection of facts." I would also reference "structure, integrity, manipulation" because that's darn good too.
Hey, how about this one?
Q: Is a database just an alternate way of having persistent data, like a structured file system?
- NO! Persistence is neither necessary nor sufficient for a database management system. DBMSs provide "structure, integrity, and manipulation" of databases.
> > Q: What do we mean by "theory"?
I would certainly like to have a better definition for this word myself.
> > Q: Is name-calling permitted in this forum?
> > A. This forum does have a history of name-calling, but we prefer more
> > civility. Good-natured humor is welcome.
>
> I have been reading (and at times contributing to)
> this newsgroup for half a year now, and though there
> were some incidents, I have seen worse.
> People tend to treat eachother nicely.
> Your posts date back half a year longer.
> I did some reading back older messages, it does
> seem to have improved. Any other impressions?
I checked Google groups; my first post here was about 2 years ago. (It seems longer. :-) I was getting tired of comp.lang.java.programmer, and comp.object was just ridiculously abstract.
A year ago, this newsgroup was simply hateful, every day. Rudeness was the rule, not the exception. Some of the regulars had the opinion that rudeness from people with a good grounding in theory was acceptible, an opinion I do not share.
It's *much* better now.
If we put the FAQ on a wiki, anyone can contribute in a low-overhead way.
Marshall Received on Mon Sep 27 2004 - 08:36:01 CEST