Re: Modeling Address using Relational Theory
From: Marshall Spight <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com>
Date: 31 Aug 2005 18:37:32 -0700
Message-ID: <1125538652.912144.28340_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
> Absolutely agreed. However, the student with a Major1 of Biology and a
> Major2 of Theater is likely to walk at graduation with the Theater
> majors while if the order is reversed, they will walk with the Biology
> majors (this is, of course, dependent on the business rules of the
> institution, but the fact is that business rules might be set based on
[Quoted] > this ordering whose value is embedded in an attribute name).
Date: 31 Aug 2005 18:37:32 -0700
Message-ID: <1125538652.912144.28340_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
dawn wrote:
>
> Absolutely agreed. However, the student with a Major1 of Biology and a
> Major2 of Theater is likely to walk at graduation with the Theater
> majors while if the order is reversed, they will walk with the Biology
> majors (this is, of course, dependent on the business rules of the
> institution, but the fact is that business rules might be set based on
[Quoted] > this ordering whose value is embedded in an attribute name).
Well, I actually have two majors, and I can tell you that there was no ordering between them in the "business rules" of the university that I attended.
> Yes and that is one of my points. I was completely unaware that it was
> considered proper relational modeling to place ordering data in
> attribute names,
[Quoted] It isn't. And that's not what's happening with addresses, either.
Marshall Received on Thu Sep 01 2005 - 03:37:32 CEST