Re: Objects and Relations

On Feb 26, 7:44 pm, "Alfredo Novoa" <alfred..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 feb, 01:13, "David BL" <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yes, like most on this NG you say that RM+RA is for recording and
> > managing data, while OO is not. Unfortunately this view is
> > simplistic.
>
> > Consider the following
> > * Images
> > * Text
> > * Source code
> > * Scenegraphs
> > * CAD drawings
> > * Tri-surfaces
> > * Web pages
> > * Sound data
> > * Video data
>
> > None of these areas appear to be handled particularly well with RM
> > +RA.
>
> Completely wrong. Your view is profoundly ignorant. Please learn what
> the Relational Model really is before writing.

RM is not complicated.

> > In fact why stop there? Be bold and suggest that all digitally stored
> > data in the world, including all web pages, music, video and source
> > code be represented at the logical level using relations.
>
> The world would be a better place with this.
>
> Regards- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Perhaps you could find me an example in the literature where RM+RA has been found suitable and effective for representing and processing strings or images - at least at the logical level. Could you list some of the advantages? Are the images or strings merely treated as RVAs? Received on Mon Feb 26 2007 - 13:55:16 CET