VC wrote:
> "Jan Hidders" <jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be> wrote in message
> news:AyVye.138732$g63.7370802_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> [...]
>
>>Ah, but now you are using the domain or relations, right? There is a
>>problem with that domain. It doesn't exist. The collection of all
>>relations is a proper class, and not a set, but domains have to be sets.
>
> The collection of all relations is most certainly a set, and therefore, a
> domain, domain being a synonym of set. The term "proper class" implies
> that you talk in terms of set theory other than ZF ( Zermelo - Fraenkel ) ).
> There is no need to do so for the reltional model unless you can show there
> is ;)
There is indeed no such need, unless of course you want to define the
domain of relations, which you cannot do in ZF.
Received on Tue Jul 12 2005 - 16:22:45 CDT
