Re: circular relationships ok?
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 13:18:03 +0100
Message-ID: <4406e27b$1_at_news.fhg.de>
Roy Hann schrieb:
> "Alexandr Savinov" <spam_at_conceptoriented.com> wrote in message
> news:4406cd86$1_at_news.fhg.de...
>> Roy Hann schrieb:
>
>>> Rubbish. I refuse to believe; I don't refuse to be persuaded. >> Nobody is going to persuade you.
>
> Well evidently nobody is going to try anyway.
>
>> Only you can do it (if you want to).
>
> I am very good at persuading myself of things. Mostly they are wrong or
> insane. That's why I try to keep them to myself until I have formed an
> argument that I hope would persuade a skeptic.
>
>> I have not made any assertions
>
> I believe we may be encountering a language barrier here. Since (to my
> shame) I speak only English I guess we're not going to get any further with
> this because I can't express what I said any differently.
>
>> You are already nowhere because you lost the focus of this thread. Here >> is again the problem (as far as I understand it): how to get rid of >> cycles in modeling relationships. Do you have a solution? Do you have >> questions concerning my solution?
>
> I guess I do have a question actually. Why would I ever want to get rid of
> a cycle? (What fundamental purpose is served by that? What fundamental
> damage is not done by that?)
The only constructive thing among all your posts. But this question is not to me. Generally I think cycle are not a very good thing. The presence shows that something is wrong in the theory. It is of course too general assertion and probably the originator of this thread has his own arguments why cycles should be avoided.
>> Whether you are interested or not is your own problem and (again) I am >> not going to teach you what direction in data modeling to choose. I can >> only *inform* you *if* you have an interest.
>
> I think you are promoting an unnecessary idea (for fun or profit, I don't
As I said already, here in this thread I do not promote anything (directly). I just proposed a solution the problem. Both the solution and the problem may well be bad but it is precisely what we want to discuss here.
> care). For various reasons I dislike seeing unsubstantiated assertions
> about mysteriously beneficial database design methodologies. On the other
> hand, I am keenly interested in good ideas that solve real problems
I afraid that here you try to cheat yourself when you say that "I am keenly interested in good ideas". You are probably interested in *ready* and well substantiated ideas but that directly means that such an idea is rather old. New ideas by definition cannot be substantiated and hence you need to take active position and turn your intuition on. I
> properly. I am quite ready to read about them, right here, right now,
> because I could be wrong. Please, get me interested. One paragraph.
I am sorry but you should do it yourself - I do not want to force anybody to do anything. But I am ready to help you if you need it (answer concrete questions).
-- http://conceptoriented.comReceived on Thu Mar 02 2006 - 13:18:03 CET