Re: Lucid statement of the MV vs RM position?

Jon Heggland wrote:
> dawn wrote:

[snip]
> > In order to model as much meaning as feasible, I want my data modeled
> > in a biased way (a way biased toward meaning where color and paper are
> > different, see chat with JOG on this topic),
>
> "Biased towards meaning"---as opposed to what? Meaninglessness? I'm
> talking about biased towards query as opposed to update, or towards
> certain queries at the expense of others. Twisting reasonably accepted
> terms like that does not help your argument.

Agree. I like the "biased towards certain queries at the expense of others" - it's a nice way of putting it.

>
> FWIW, I don't endorse the entity-attribute thinking you (and JOG)
> indulge in. It confuses the issue, and does not contribute anything. For
> example, I consider treating colour and paper differently a flaw, not an
> advantage.

Exactly Jon - there is no difference between them and treating them so is flawed . Dawn has assumed a colour is a 'weak entity', but there is no justification for this assumption from the propositions that were inititally supplied.

Workload means i can't currently reply in full to dawn - but trying to clarify why E-A thinking can be misleading in terms of the logical model is a worthwhile (if not easy) exercise imo.

>
> >> Why do you want to "persist" "data for
> >> exchange"? (I'm not really comfortable with either of those terms.)
> >
> > OK, I want to store all of the transactions coming in from web
> > services. Is that any better? --dawn
>
> Like a log? I still don't see where you're going, or why you think
> "multivalues" are needed.
> --
> Jon
Received on Wed May 03 2006 - 18:06:41 CEST