Re: Lucid statement of the MV vs RM position?
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 15:44:48 GMT
Message-ID: <Qjp6g.3168$A26.82703_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> Perhaps, so we might benefit from comparing our reasons for differing.
> However, my reasons involves viewing application bias as a bad thing,
> and declarative, centralised integrity control as a good thing---and my
> impression is that you and the rest of the pick/MV crowd disagree with
> those basic premises. Perhaps you consider them religious in nature?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 15:44:48 GMT
Message-ID: <Qjp6g.3168$A26.82703_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Jon Heggland wrote:
> dawn wrote:
>
>>Jon Heggland wrote: >> >>>to use RVAs in >>>relational modelling, my short answer is "when there is no other >>>choice"---cf. GUNF. >> >>Then that is a point where we differ. Later. --dawn
>
> Perhaps, so we might benefit from comparing our reasons for differing.
> However, my reasons involves viewing application bias as a bad thing,
> and declarative, centralised integrity control as a good thing---and my
> impression is that you and the rest of the pick/MV crowd disagree with
> those basic premises. Perhaps you consider them religious in nature?
One wonders, if the pick crown reject the principles for data management widely accepted by others, upon what principles, if any, do they evaluate the products they use? Received on Thu May 04 2006 - 17:44:48 CEST