Re: Dawn doesn't like 1NF

"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.comREMOVE> wrote in message news:ckcqt3$3o1$1_at_news.netins.net...

> A mathematical relation may certainly have a relation as an element, as
well
> as a collection, an ordered tuple, etc. The non-mathematical statement
that
> entered into the theory was the statement that since it is simpler to
> exclude non-simple types, then if we can do everything with relations by
> excluding such types, then we ought to take this route in order to have
> simpler mathematics. That is NOT a statement from within mathematics.

It might be nice if you would tell us if the Date revision to 1NF alters your attitude towards 1NF.

> I'll try to catch up with the other postings here and pitch in again --
I'd
> like everyone to agree with me on this one. ;-)

Oh yeah. I'd like everyone o agree with me, too! Received on Mon Oct 11 2004 - 05:37:45 CEST