Re: MV Keys

On 1 Mar 2006 11:05:57 -0800, "dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>I agree with Date tossing out normalization as defined by Codd, but not
>with his attempt to redefine 1NF to be meaningless. It is difficult to
>move foward if people still have the mistaken impression that database
>theory requires that we remove repeating groups.

Who are "people"??? (as in: "...people still have the mistaken impression that database theory requires that we remove repeating groups")

You seem to equate "database theory" with the relational model here. The RM requires removing repeating groups. Database theory is ... well, theory ... AFAIK it doesn't "require" anything.

>The redefinitions of the term "normalize" make it difficult to
>communicate too. The industry no longer thinks we must normalize data
>and many, like me, don't even think that should be a goal. Functional
>dependencies are another matter. If we want to redefine the term
>normalize, we should be clear that no longer requires 1NF (formally
>named "normalization" by Codd).

Who said that "we" (whoever that may be) want to "redefine the term normalize"? I didn't ...

This really reminds me a lot of the "Some people say..." phrase on Fox news. ;) Dawn, I think you really need to stop talking in the 1st person plural!

--
Bob Hairgrove
NoSpamPlease_at_Home.com