Re: Proposal: 6NF
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 14:09:13 GMT
Message-ID: <dyOVg.43140$rP1.14393_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au>
David Cressey wrote:
> "Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> David Cressey wrote: >>> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message >>> >>>> ... A dbms is a formal logic system ... >>> Bullshit. >> Without knowing it, Barking Dog Prime means that he conceives a dbms as >> a formal logic system that should handle missing data in a >> deterministic manner as opposed to non deterministic method incarnated >> by SQL NULLS. On that, he is right 100% and you are wrong.
> I don't know how you figure out what BD1 means if he doesn't know it
> himself.
Thats easy - BB is so self assured in his Emperors outfit as a self appointed guardian of relational truth that he would never be able to assess his own persona.
> His words were bullshit, and I was careful to quote the exact part that was
> bullshit.
And worthy of being called out.
> Where I started from was that a DBMS should have a "systematic treatment of
> missing data". That doesn't necessarily imply that SQL's treatment is a
> good one, or that, if it is a good one, a better one cannot be devised. I
> prefer SQL's treatment
> to several alternatives I've seen, including the alternative of forbidding
> all missing data, and the alternative of treating NULL as a special value.
A fair assessment IMO.
[..]
>> So do me a favor, do not engage him, he is lost cause for inquisitive >> and questionning purposes...
>
> Given that he has just plonked me, the result you wish may be in the cards
> anyway.
I wonder how long before he is left to converse with himself?
Cheers Frank. Received on Sat Oct 07 2006 - 16:09:13 CEST