Re: TRM - Morbidity has set in, or not?
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 04:24:53 GMT
Message-ID: <pAxag.8691$A26.220515_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>>I just stumbled over this exchange from Oct 2005 on the TRM...
>>
>> http://www.dbms2.com/2005/10/10/17/
>>
>>It was authored by a "Curt Monash" - is he known to any CDT'ers and/or
>>credible?
>>
>>Is there any veracity in _any_ of the claims made by _any_ of the parties?
>>
>>Given lots of mud gets flung as the discussion proceeds so I wondered if
>>there was any corroborative or contrary sources.
>>
>>Cheers, Frank.
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 04:24:53 GMT
Message-ID: <pAxag.8691$A26.220515_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
vldm10 wrote:
> Frank Hamersley wrote: >
>>I just stumbled over this exchange from Oct 2005 on the TRM...
>>
>> http://www.dbms2.com/2005/10/10/17/
>>
>>It was authored by a "Curt Monash" - is he known to any CDT'ers and/or
>>credible?
>>
>>Is there any veracity in _any_ of the claims made by _any_ of the parties?
>>
>>Given lots of mud gets flung as the discussion proceeds so I wondered if
>>there was any corroborative or contrary sources.
>>
>>Cheers, Frank.
> > You can try my solution. It effectively shows how to decompose > arbitrary relation into its binary relations. It is on my web site: > www.dbdesign10.com > Yesterday I added two new small chapters (4 and 5) that are about > "theoretical" side of this problem. I believe that my solution is > simple, correct and more general than TransRelatinal Model (TM). > > Vladimir Odrljin
I found your web article confusing. Are you defining a logical data model? Or a conceptual model?
If it is a conceptual model, correctness is not particularly relevant.
If it was supposed to be a logical data model, it wasn't simple. Received on Wed May 17 2006 - 06:24:53 CEST