cdt glossary - TABLE (was: Base Normal Form)

Jan Hidders wrote:
> mAsterdam wrote:

>> David Cressey wrote:
>>> Jan Hidders wrote:
>>>> David Cressey wrote:
>>>>> Jan Hidders wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that would be very confusing. First, his table actually has
>>>>>> ordering, functions don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not clear to me that a table has ordering, if I understand you
>>>>> correctly.
>>>>
>>>> Since you did not really define the notion of "table" but distinguished
>>>> it from relation I made a guess that by table you meant something where
>>>> the tuples were ordered as in a list. But since it's your term you get
>>>> to define it, so if you say it is a bag, then it is a bag. Is it?
>>>
>>> Actually, I didn't think there would be any discussion of the word 
>>> "table".
>>>
>>> All I mean by "table" is the same thing that the word means in common 
>>> SQL
>>> parlance. And that's what I expected everyone to understand that I 
>>> meant.
>>> Oh, well.
>>>
>>> I'd be very surprised if the cdt glossary has no entry for "table". 
>>> It seems a curious omission.
>>
>> Which misunderstanding is there about "table"?

The current (0.0.4) glossary entry,

> [Table/Row/Column] (SQL-DBMS)
> Table: A collection of columns (the table header) and rows (the body).
> Row: A collection of values, conforming to the table header columns.
>
> One table may contain data about one entity,
> about several entities, about one or several
> relationships or any combination.
> A column can be seen as the attribute of the
> entity/one of the entities/relationships
> about which the table is concerned.

, says nothing about the rows being ordered or not. Should it? Received on Sat Jul 09 2005 - 18:28:50 CEST