Re: Proposal: 6NF
Date: 7 Oct 2006 11:19:03 -0700
Message-ID: <1160245143.084074.39620_at_h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
Frank Hamersley wrote:
>
> Hmmmm - IMO SQL _is_ deterministic on handling NULLs! I suspect you are
> confusing the complexity arising from 3VL logic combined with the
> schizoid meanings applied by interpreters (like Davids suggestion -
> snipped) and oversimplifying the complexity (mess) as "non
> deterministic". If this causes offense please read it again as no
> slight is intended.
SQL or anything related to SQL is lost cause for a long time...People
on the comittee are total idiots and do not understand shit about
mathematical determinism so they created one of their own to fit their
unfounded conclusions...why NULLS would be 3 VL why not N-VL? Did they
prove it with sound reasonning? NO.
OTOH, subjectivity should be handled by a relational system as much as formal representation and structural aspect... A user should be able to caprure missing data but missing data should treated with a mechanism that insure a thruthful representation of reality in counts and facts presented by the DBMS...
> > 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.
Discussing people has no interest for this NG....I won't dicuss that,
it is a waste of time...
> > His words were bullshit, and I was careful to quote the exact part that was
> > bullshit.
I already exposed BB's incoherence and ignorance of mathematical
fundamental concepts at several occasions...They are exposed in the FEW
(Fraud Exposal Wall) besides some of his companions....
> And worthy of being called out.
>
[Snipped]
>
> >> 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?
He can't, he will probably plonk himself...
Received on Sat Oct 07 2006 - 20:19:03 CEST