Re: One-To-One Relationships

JOG wrote:

>[...] My impression is that
>proponents of OO and E/R as a model unto itself, promote entities as
>first class citizens of a model, whereas RM proponents and logicians
>do not, utilizing them as second class citizens to be talked /about/.
>As Reiner appears to place himself in the E/R bracket I'd very much
>think he is claiming the former.

Not only that: I claimed that doing so resolves a very familiar problem (namely, the need to sometimes refer rather than describe) in a very straightforward way.

[...]

>Absolutely not. At the conceptual level I believe this is how most
>people think, and the model is their to facilitate them after all. I
>just believe there are numerous conceptual models, all equally valid,
>that can emerge from a neutral logical one,

You believe it; I can mathematically prove it. Isn't that better?

>and I fear entity-
>relationship thought as an end to itself can get one stuck in one
>brittle viewpoint (this is the same concern I have with XML).

My only point is that relational modelling is not inherently neutral, and has its own source of brittleness (the need to pick keys).

-- 
Reinier