Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate&Darwin?[M.Gittens]
From: Jan Hidders <jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 18:04:06 GMT
Message-ID: <q8eze.139524$vw4.7391354_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be>
>
> I still do not undertsand. Let's assume we define the object as an element
> belonging to a set.
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 18:04:06 GMT
Message-ID: <q8eze.139524$vw4.7391354_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be>
VC wrote:
> "Jan Hidders" <jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be> wrote in message
> news:ZmWye.138790$Kn.7314565_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>
>>VC wrote: >> >>>>>So what's the difference between an object and a conceptual object ? >>>> >>>>A conceptual object is an object that is part of the universe of >>>>discourse that is under consideration. >>> >>> That's cool, but what I was resally asking was what the difference >>>between an "object" and the "conceptual object". What is the word >>>"conceptual" doing here ? >> >>?? You mean, apart from indicating that this particular object belongs the >>universe of discourse?
>
> I still do not undertsand. Let's assume we define the object as an element
> belonging to a set.
Ok. Let's call that set UoE, the universe of everything.
> You are saying that a "conceptual object" belongs to a
> universe of discourse, the universe being a synonym of a set, I hope. Now,
> my question is really simple: do an "object" and a "conceptual object"
> belong to different sets ?
- Jan Hidders