Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Fraud Number 3: U-Gene

Re: Fraud Number 3: U-Gene

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:01:23 GMT
Message-ID: <DmZlg.109$pu3.1821@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>


Tony D wrote:

> Cimode wrote:
>

>>>But I'm not sure how you could confuse an attribute with a relvar.
>>
>>As I stated B4 if their definition are too similar to be clearly
>>distinguished..It's an open highway for unexperienced audiences to
>>confuse both.  This is the last explanation I will give on that
>>point...I have already answered above and I will stop reexplaining....

>
> But a variable is time varying; an attribute is, for want of a better
> word, an attribute of a relation *value*, so it can't change. I simply
> don't see how this confusion can come about.

But an attribute is a variable in the sense that predicate calculus uses 'variable' even if one cannot use imperative statements to change it.

>>*change* is a verb that leads to confusion in defining the relationship
>>between variables and values.  *change* supposes a modification of
>>state which.  I prefer the definition of variable as a *value holder*
>>which give a much more clearer indication .

>
> I don't see that. Values never change. Which value is indicated by a
> variable can.
>
>
>>You are confusing domain and type...

>
> I'm not confusing them; I'm saying that I don't see a need for the
> separation between them that you're describing. Can you say why you
> would separate them in such a way ?

I have no opinion on the remainder. Received on Tue Jun 20 2006 - 16:01:23 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US