Re: Perhaps an idiotic question

From: Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 30 Nov 2006 11:21:29 -0800
Message-ID: <1164914489.875367.33610@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>

paul c a écrit :

> But it perplexes me even though I admit I have no good reason for asking:
>
> If I declare a relation (or more properly a relvar) R to have an
> attribute A where A's type is the type of R am I declaring a fallacy or
> something that is logically possible (ignoring whether it has any use)?
>
> p

The question certainly is not idiotic but few words seem missing.

If A is to be considered un-ary relation creating type T1 by restriction and R is un-ary relation creating type T2 then it would not be a fallacy to assume T1=T2. In all other cases, I do not see how it could be validated as true. Received on Thu Nov 30 2006 - 13:21:29 CST