Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: The naive test for equality

Re: The naive test for equality

From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:38:18 +0200
Message-ID: <42fb9b01$0$11070$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>


Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> mAsterdam wrote:

>>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>dawn wrote:

[snip agreement]

>>>>There are always differences of opinion about what constitutes a
>>>>student on a campus. Finance people often use the term as if the
>>>>student were the same as a corporate customer. Student = Customer. If
>>>>someone has received some approval to audit a course for zero dollars,
>>>>the instructor might consider them a student. That is just an example,
>>>>but the point is that entity names are also just words and are
>>>>interpreted by humans, each of whom brings a different context to the
>>>>meaning of the word.
>>>
>>> Such a student is a student by the normal use of the term.
>>>I think this factor is what causes a lot of the trouble.
>>
>>Could you elaborate some on this factor?

> 
>      One who studies.  If I study medieval history, I am a student.  I
> might not be enrolled anywhere.  I could even be a leading authority
> in the field.

I see what you mean, but I am not sure you got my question right. I meant: what is this factor which is causing a lot of trouble? In more modern words: what is the anatomy of this anti-pattern? We might learn to more easily recognize it.

>>> At my alma mater, there are three major classifications: student,
>>>faculty, and staff. They are not mutually exclusive. I have known of
>>>faculty who were students and staff who were faculty. There is
>>>nothing stopping a staff member from taking a course (making him also
>>>a student) or for someone to be in all three categories at the same
>>>time.
>>
>>Let's not draw subtyping into it at this point.
>>(Other thread welcome :-)

> 
>      I am not subtyping, just saying that the statuses are not
> mutually exclusive.

Ok. Received on Thu Aug 11 2005 - 13:38:18 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US