Re: 1 NF

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 00:10:26 GMT
Message-ID: <SXJFh.1198134$R63.78342@pd7urf1no>

-CELKO- wrote:

>>>the relation that contains the combinations of parts ever shipped in one or more shipments, a set of sets if you will. <<

>
>
> This is not 1NF in most cases be a single attribute because each part
> has meaning in the data model. YOu teally do want to look at them. To
> make 1NF atomic you would need a data model in which the lowst unit is
> the shipment -- a container level model.
> ...

You are using what Edward de Bono called porridge words to distort a question you can't or won't answer into one you think you can or want to answer. The meaning of the set seems succinct to me, no "data model" was mentioned and "each part has meaning" comes from left field. Surely you are answering an unasked question, I can only guess it has to do with a domain of parts which wasn't mentioned rather than a domain of combinations which was mentioned. Can you say plainly which? Eg., if you think it is an impossible relation or if you think it is an irrelevant relation or if you think RT doesn't permit such relations, why not say so instead of "not 1NF in MOST cases"?

p Received on Thu Mar 01 2007 - 18:10:26 CST