Re: Constraints and Functional Dependencies
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 21:43:54 +0100
Message-ID: <45e0a32a$0$334$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
> It looked to me as if the OP did define it.
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 21:43:54 +0100
Message-ID: <45e0a32a$0$334$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
> I don't think it is the same, rather it is the opposite - I don't think
> the definition assumes any keys at all. As I said, that's okay by me.
Please see my reply to your earlier post.
...
>> Slightly more important: at this stage in the OP's >> argumentation the term (candidate) key has not yet been defined. >> ...
>
> It looked to me as if the OP did define it.
It did. Later. Received on Sat Feb 24 2007 - 21:43:54 CET