Re: By The Dawn's Normal Light

From: Laconic2 <>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:14:03 -0400
Message-ID: <>

"erk" <> wrote in message

> But since the old definition is useless, why not appropriate it? But
> granted that using the term "relation" implies a correct "version" of
> the definition of 1NF, so it's somewhat pointless to quibble.

But who declares the old definition "useless"? Is there some sort of peer review on this process, like there is in the world of science? And what happens to all the body of theoretical papers that are already out there that make a point that's valid under the old definition, but are suddenly logically wrong under the new definition. Do we ask Winston do go back and rewrite all those papers so as to be "correct" under the new definition?

Or do we just throw the old papers in the memory hole? Received on Wed Oct 27 2004 - 21:14:03 CEST

Original text of this message