Re: Translating constraints to RM Terms

From: Kenneth Downs <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 12:57:06 -0400
Message-Id: <a0cen2-10n.ln1@pluto.downsfam.net>

Alfredo Novoa wrote:

> On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 08:14:12 -0400, Kenneth Downs
> <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock> wrote:
>

>>Jonathan gave a pretty clear answer on type <> domain,

>
> Where?
>
> He said: column <> domain.

my bad, I meant column <> domain

>
> Type and domain are almost always used as synonyms.
>

>> so I am with you so
>>far.  Most importantly, the restatement of the question as relationship
>>twixt types and constraints is on the money.  In my own mind I am also
>>asking if the constraint is a property of the column or the table.

>
> Your constraint is a property of the table because it is not a column
> type constraint.
>
>
> Regards

-- 
Kenneth Downs
Secure Data Software, Inc.
(Ken)nneth@(Sec)ure(Dat)a(.com)

Received on Mon Jun 06 2005 - 11:57:06 CDT