# Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model

Date: 6 Jun 2006 08:32:17 -0700

Message-ID: <1149607936.978931.195240_at_y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>

x wrote:

> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message

*> news:AhGgg.17481$A26.406047_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
**> > Cimode wrote:
**>
**>
**> > >
**> > > //A SQL table with three attributes is always three dimensional
**> > > independently of how it is implemented.//
**> > >
**> > > At logical level yes but not at physical level.
**>
**> > At any level, Cimode. If you don't mean to refer to the SQL table, then
**> > refer to something else that you do mean. *Any triplet, though,
**> > represents three dimensions.*
**>
**> Huh ?!?
**>
**> > > //<<I suppose that you know how to represent a cube with a table.>> It
**> > > is
**> > > an analogy used for communication's sake. You misread and
**> > > misunderstood my comment. I said that a face of a cube is
**> > > bidimensional and is a comparable to what a SQL Table is to a relvar.
**>
**> > And any representation of a face of a cube is *bidimensional*. However,
**> > any representation of the cube is three dimensional, or it no longer
**> > represents a cube. Don't confuse the projection of a cube with a cube.
**>
**> I would say that given the fact that the cube is 3D, the face coordinates
**> are triplets.
*

The cube is a perfect example of tridimensional. Each point in the cube can be referenced trough a 3 point coordinate system. Now, each face is bidimensional and each point can be referenced through both a 2 point coordinate system AND a 3 point coordinate system. What changes is only the referential and origin. Received on Tue Jun 06 2006 - 17:32:17 CEST