Re: Logical equivalence of simple and complex types under the relational model?
From: Alfredo Novoa <alfredo_at_ncs.es>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:36:26 GMT
Message-ID: <41ae00ac.11038343_at_news.wanadoo.es>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:36:26 GMT
Message-ID: <41ae00ac.11038343_at_news.wanadoo.es>
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:35:33 +0100, "Rene de Visser"
<Rene_de_Visser_at_hotmail.de> wrote:
>And am I correct in thinking that if we have a relation containing a date
You are right.
>It also seems to me that we can consider '2004/12/2' as a atomic from Codds
You are missing that Codd's definitions are flawed because he used the
not well defined term: "atomic".
Codd's definitions are outdated.
>e.g. ("Sally", '2004/12/2')
>we can create an updatable view corresponding to this relation where the
>tuple looks like:
>("Sally", 2004, 12, 2)?
>definitions and consider
>the 2004, 12, 2 to be properties (as defined by Codd) of '2004/12/2'. Or am
>I missing something here?
Regards Received on Wed Dec 01 2004 - 18:36:26 CET