Re: Generalised approach to storing address details

Neo wrote:

> > Just because they do this doesn't make it correct. A user's failings do
> > not reflect on the system they are using. When you employ EAV to
> > circumvent a schema, you are not using the RM as the logical model,
> > full stop.
>
> Please show a non-EAV solution that meets OP's requirements.

First show me some indication that you understand that the EAV approach does not use RM as the logical model, even if it is using a relational database as storage, and that EAV = a ternary model = graph data model = hyperstructure, depending on your field. I am not trying to make you appear stupid, but I do need to guage whether it is worth my time continuing to discuss this.

>
> > RM's scope is unarguable. All information can be recorded as propositions,
> > and all propositions can be represented in the relational model.
>
> Any data model can theoretically record any proposition. But the
> ability to do it systematically varies.

"The ability of a system to record any proposition varies"? That is such an overloaded, nebulous and imprecise statement, that its hard to glean any meaning from it at all. This was my exact point to you. If you want real discussion stop waving your hands in the air and construct meaningful (as in specific) statements.

> Please show how to record the
> proposition "john likes mary" such that db can answer 1) who likes mary
> 2) john likes who 3) john does what to mary.

Absolutely irrelevant to what we were talking about, but you cannot seem to lose that agenda of yours hey. I assume you realise the first two are trivial, and the point you are trying to make is that it is not possible to extract information about predicates in SQL using the DML. Is that your intended point? Received on Mon Dec 11 2006 - 00:48:56 CET