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@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
>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)?

You are right.

>It also seems to me that we can consider '2004/12/2' as a atomic from Codds
>definitions and consider
>the 2004, 12, 2 to be properties (as defined by Codd) of '2004/12/2'. Or am
>I missing something here?

You are missing that Codd's definitions are flawed because he used the not well defined term: "atomic".

Codd's definitions are outdated.

Regards Received on Wed Dec 01 2004 - 11:36:26 CST