Re: One-To-One Relationships

From: paul c <>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 17:38:01 GMT
Message-ID: <ZTX3j.7775$UQ1.5775_at_pd7urf1no>

JOG wrote:
> Anything that can be described as a noun is an entity in my book,
> whether abstract or not. We must be able to describe them by their
> attributes, and identify them by one attribute that is consistent over
> the lifetime in the universe of discourse. That's my take.
> ...

Not to brag, but in my haphazard quest to discern only the essential, I have wondered too about the possible importance of nouns. Can't prove it but I'm pretty sure any set of domain values can be turned into a noun, eg., "red" becomes "redness". Same for a "relationship entity". I'd say "noun" is an improvement over "entity" if that might make it more obvious that most logical system doesn't need to understand English grammar. But it also seems like a risky invite for more mountain-building by the techies with ulterior motives who like to turn nouns into verbs, eg., "architect". Received on Fri Nov 30 2007 - 18:38:01 CET

Original text of this message