Re: Translating constraints to RM Terms
From: Alfredo Novoa <alfredo_novoa_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 16:18:43 +0200
Message-ID: <kom8a1pptflq1aj1goidsm03p47t3ohulm_at_4ax.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 16:18:43 +0200
Message-ID: <kom8a1pptflq1aj1goidsm03p47t3ohulm_at_4ax.com>
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 08:05:36 -0400, Kenneth Downs <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock> wrote:
>Then I guess my question is restated, does the RM have anything to say about
>defining one column in terms of another?
Queries.
> While the constraint is generally
>expressed and accepted as existing as a property of the *table*, is it not
>in fact a fundamental property of COLUMN A?
It is not.
Regards Received on Mon Jun 06 2005 - 16:18:43 CEST