Re: Dawn doesn't like 1NF

From: Marshall Spight <mspight_at_dnai.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 02:54:52 GMT
Message-ID: <0qI9d.331735$mD.311492@attbi_s02>

"Laconic2" <laconic2_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:CbydnaMpAdDJq_vcRVn-gQ_at_comcast.com...

>

> If you will recall, Dawn started a discussion in here a few months ago with
> the (somewhat wry) title of "Date's first great blunder." In that article,
> the difference between Date's formulation of 1NF and Codd's formulation of
> 1NF was outlined pretty clearly. Equally clear, at least to me, was that
> Dawn's objection to 1NF was based on the requirement that column values be
> atomic, and not based on the difference between a bag and a set. The
> details of that discussion covered an awful lot of the ground you are
> sending me off to Date to "learn".

Found it.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&c2coff=1&safe=off&threadm=c5ia56%24t04%241%40news.netins.net&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fas_epq%3DDate%27s%2520first%2520great%2520blunder%26safe%3Doff%26as_ugroup%3Dcomp.databases.theory%26lr%3Dlang_en%26hl%3Den

Marshall Received on Fri Oct 08 2004 - 21:54:52 CDT