Is a relation's 'name' in fact a pointer? Relation names obviously
don't come under the remit of the information principle, yet they are
essential to database manipulation and querying. Are they hence an
acceptable/necessary exception?
In TTM's cogent discussion of OID's Date & Darwin talk about "a
database relvar might reasonably have an attribute whose values are
(say) ... 'database relvar names'". This strikes as possibly generating
a form of addressing/dereferencing procedure. Jim.
Received on Thu May 18 2006 - 12:37:44 CDT
