| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Another view on analysis and ER
David Cressey wrote:
> "Jan Hidders" <hidders_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0c5c22b8-cdb3-462c-b55d-4c63d7974001_at_a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On 7 dec, 12:17, Jon Heggland <jon.heggl..._at_ntnu.no> wrote:
>>
>>>Quoth David BL:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I wasn't actually intending that Location be necessary for
>>>>identification of a marriage. I'll make the intensional definition
>>>>clearer:-
>>>
>>>> married(Husband, Wife, Location) :-
>>>> Husband is *currently* married to Wife
>>>> and they (last) got married at Location
>>>
>>>>Candidate keys are { Husband } or { Wife }, enforcing monogamy
>>>>integrity constraints.
>>>
>>>So Marriage is a relationship between a Husband and a Wife, yet it is
>>>identified by either, not the combination? I thought I finally had the
>>>common definition of "relationship" pegged, and then this comes along.
>>>
>>>I suppose I am looking for rigor where there is none, though. The
>>>definition of entity---something that is identified independently of
>>>other entities---is also rather half-baked. Take weak entities, for
>>>instance.
>>
>>Allow me to make an attempt at a few definitions:
>>
>>Entities are things.
>>Relationships are predicates.
>>
>>What's wrong with this picture?
>>
Instantiation. Received on Fri Dec 07 2007 - 11:29:49 CST
![]() |
![]() |