Re: Dawn doesn't like 1NF

From: Marshall Spight <mspight_at_dnai.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 06:21:15 GMT
Message-ID: <vhJcd.259981$MQ5.91025@attbi_s52>

"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message news:oWCcd.276338$3l3.8376_at_attbi_s03...

> But if we suspect that 1NF was bunk to begin with, perhaps we can
> also amend the definitions of 2NF, etc. not to refer to the definition
> of 1NF. They don't particularly seem to need it [1NF] except perhaps
> to support some esthetically pleasing induction on the defnitions
> of the normal forms.

In fact, maybe we should just renumber them.

2NF -> 1NF
3NF -> 2NF
BCNF -> 3NF 4+ stay the same.

Ha ha! Let's rewrite the history books!

Marshall Received on Mon Oct 18 2004 - 01:21:15 CDT