attribute name conflicts

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:14:58 GMT
Message-ID: <62wgi.68059$NV3.45985@pd7urf2no>

I believe Codd originally envisaged "tables" that had what he called

domain names to identify "columns" but that in his second paper, he 
introduced what we know of as attribute names because he wanted, for 
example, to allow for relations between things of the same type, such as 

ones used for bills of materials.

That's fine as far as single relations go, but it's always led me to a question about a whole database. Does it ever make sense within a given application (as opposed to within a given db) to have two different attribute names that identify different types/domains?

(obviously those attribute names would occur in the def'ns of distinct relations.)

p Received on Wed Jun 27 2007 - 11:14:58 CDT