Re: Database design

From: Mark Johnson <102334.12_at_compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:41:25 -0800
Message-ID: <e9fov1l1a8mv1276qferk8r4hlekhmcgph_at_4ax.com>


Alexandr Savinov <spam_at_conceptoriented.com> wrote:

>Is it really necessary for an entity to be inside a relation?

>The question is actually deeper than it seems to be. It can be
>reformulated in more general form as follows: can things live in
>isolation outside an environment? If yes, then entities probably do not
>need your constraint. I would prefer a variant where entities do not
>need an environment (a relation) and can exist in isolation because it
>is simpler. However, I cannot believe that it is possible because I have
>never seen entities in isolation and hence I think it does not make sense.

I was getting more at the idea of semantics and structure. Meaning becomes greater by combination, by blocking, by incorporation. Atoms retain their meaning and usefulness, but become more useful as part of something greater, and also pose a threat to something greater is used outside expected constraints.

I made a distinction between the top level and initial state and those which followed. But they are really the same thing. Again, take a MIDI composer example. 'Clips' can be stored in a tree consisting of tones, control scalars on one or more channels and multiple tracks. It's not unlike a short flourish which a performer might insert into most any performance to place on it their unique stamp. The variables are the initial tone, of course, as the rest are relative offsets, and the placement within whatever timecode.

But such clips can themselves contribute to larger clips. As such, they become atoms, as routines become 'black boxes' when incorporated into something larger (unless one needs visibility to solve a problem or wrap custom features). So each stands alone, but only as it is. Each note in the clip is still a note, given an origin, initial state. But that's all it is. And if any exceed constraints, and short of an unexpected artistic surprise, it's probably going to be considered wrong and an error.

One could imagine similar examples with artwork, photo retouching, animation and rendering, and host of things - most anything. There is meaning in each component built into other components. But itself can also be seen as relatively, qualitatively less useful and meaningful, all depending. So it simultaneously can stand alone - and not. Received on Wed Feb 22 2006 - 11:41:25 CET

Original text of this message