| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate&Darwin?[M.Gittens]
Alfredo Novoa schrieb:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:10:33 +0200, Alexandr Savinov > <savinov_at_host.com> wrote:
> > > Of course not!
Why it cannot be qualified as a data model? I aggree that it could be called a storage (like file system) because we mostly store and retrieve documents. In other words, one criterion might be that data model needs to understand and interpet what is inside those records or documents. In this case, if we add some simple facitlies like key word search into a file system then it becomes a data model. Or, for example, is RDF representation a data model? Or all the criteria a potential data model are artificially tuned to be satisfied by only one theory? I would compare it with the term algebra where everybody is not prohibited from coming up with his own algebra (usefulness and correctness are other issues). Any student can write a couple of definitions and say that it is my favorite algebra (for today). What is bad in that?
-- http://conceptoriented.comReceived on Wed Jun 22 2005 - 08:56:50 CDT
![]() |
![]() |