Re: plz normalize this table for me

From: Bob Badour <>
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:49:16 -0400
Message-ID: <4752d400$0$5266$>

paul c wrote:

> Jan Hidders wrote:
> ...

>> This group is not a home-work service. But some help will be provided
>> if you show that you have made serious effort to solve the problem
>> yourself and can make clear and explicit why you are now stuck. You
>> could start by saying which functional dependencies you think hold,
>> which normal form you would like to achieve, what you think the steps
>> of the normalization proces are and which of these steps you have
>> difficulties with.

> Right you are. Also, I remember being criticized by some pedant for
> including a "post code" in the same base relation as the address. Often
> the "business" purpose is sometimes more important to decide which FD's
> to choose. Some people think the use of codes should always involve
> an appeal to external authority, even for the simplest of systems. (I
> usually read that technocrats as meaning higher authority. Ralston-Saul
> calls technocrats the descendants of reason.)
> The question looked like it had to do with Canada, where some postal
> codes don't determine address, eg., H0H H0H determines a person (or
> should I say entity?) named Santa Claus! Such a letter will get
> delivered even to him even if his North Pole address is omitted. Even
> if that weren't so I think it depends on the app whether one wants to
> use FD's for integrity checking as opposed to structural normalization.
> This might help demonstrate why it is always harder to explain a design!

There was a typo in the postal code: H0H 0H0 Received on Sun Dec 02 2007 - 16:49:16 CET

Original text of this message