Re: Database design

"x" <x_at_not-exists.org> wrote:

>> And the question was how is that suitable for representing a
>> nested markup language?

>You'll have to zonk Leif

But the question was really how is that suitable for representing a nested markup language?

Surely others have asked the question.

>> >In other thread Mark complained about the slippery aspect of RM if I
>> >it correctly.

>> What "slippery aspect of RM" do you "recall", exactly?

>"To recall" means "to remember".
>"slippery" means "tending to slip from the hold or grasp" like soap(er).

>You complained about the quality/lack of books about the subject.

I did nothing of the sort. And I clearly recall that I said nothing about 'slippery remembrances' or slopes or whatever.

I made the obvious point that academic papers tend to be criticized for their trivial examples, which perhaps are hiding a problem with the scheme, or for other reasons. And I'm just repeating myself, over and over again, to say all this. Some had agreed, although they didn't believe I should complain of the practice.

Again, this isn't something you should have only just heard, yesterday. This is a complaint of long-standing. I was not the first to suggest it, though I am certainly one of a vast majority who confess it as a problem. Received on Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:28:55 CST