Re: repeating groups

JOG wrote:

> This discussion is extremely interesting.

Yep. It is also tricky, and there is a minefield of of hidden terminology differences. If we want to get somewhere, we'll have to iron out ambiguities. I really don't want to reduce the discussion to just vocabulary stuff - it's just that I've seen so many misunderstandings due to different habits of using words for similar things. This topic just requires some special care in the choice of words.

I'll take your sentence below as an example - not wanting to dismiss your post in any way.

> It relates to my own area,
> and I firmly believe it is a promising source of development. Sets and
> lists (ordered sets) underly almost all of modern mathematics, yet
> current DB models surely throw only cursory regard to this (and often
> exaggerate their attempts to do so).

"lists (ordered sets)"

Are they the same? No.
Lists may have duplicate items, ordered sets may not.

[snip] Received on Mon Feb 20 2006 - 23:33:33 CET