Re: the two questions

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:42:37 -0400
Message-ID: <474cd59f$0$5295$9a566e8b@news.aliant.net>

JOG wrote:

> Re. the previous post, I seem utterly incapable of remembering to
> login. I obviously blame google for this and not myself.
> 
> On Nov 27, 5:17 pm, paul c <toledobythe..._at_ooyah.ac> wrote:
> 

>>JOG wrote:
>>
>>...
>>
>>>This time I agree with you (although I did have to look up what
>>>'haeccity' meant) - it is often the case that the identifier we need
>>>isn't available to us (I mean we can't often check a butterflies dna
>>>right...).
>>>...
>>
>>In my more lucid moments I fancy I can discern the gist or essence of a
>>db design (okay, let the mystics call it application model if they want
>>and pretend that a db somehow contains "entities" as long as the
>>pretense makes them feel better and doesn't distort what the user really
>>needs) but "haecceity"? Eg., the haicceity of a database entity? Give
>>me a break!

> 
> Surely the test should be whether it is possible to repeat the phrase
> fluently after half a bottle of scotch. I personally think 'haeceity'
> is in a lot of trouble... ;)

Half-bottle of scotch? I don't think it would survive a half-glass of wine. The word makes me think about sacrificing cows.

>>As Ounslow would say, "nice"! Apparently
>>
>>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/haecceity
>>
>>gives a synonym - "quiddity". I would have guessed that had something
>>to do with being flush, money-wise but it seems it has more to with
>>obfuscation!
>>
>>I guess some people will forever want to chase butterflies.

I thought it was day-flies... (EWD709) Received on Tue Nov 27 2007 - 20:42:37 CST