Re: Something new for the New Year (2008).

On Jan 3, 11:18 am, TroyK <cs_tr..._at_juno.com> wrote:
> On Jan 1, 6:01 pm, JOG <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote:
>
<<snip>>
>
> Seconded....
>

I don't normally respond to ad hominem attacks, but let's clear the record here:
>
> From the paper:
> "There doesn't seem to be any commonly accepted name for the Figure 1
> representation. "
>
> Sure there is. It's called a subset requirement constraint.
>
I checked the 2005, 2006 and 2007 SIGMOD and PODS Proceedings. The phrase "subset requirement constraint" never occurs. I then checked E.F.Codd's "The Relational Model for Database Management" (1990) and it wasn't there either. Then I used my ACM subscription to check the Digital Library, and you know, it wasn't there either. As a last resort, I google'd the term and lo and behold, there is a book "Applied Mathematics for Database Professionals" by de Haan and Koppelaars and they use that term.

So much for "commonly accepted", at least insofar as the community of database experts and academics is concerned.
>
> Many more gems like the above where the author betrays his lack of
> understanding of the subject matter.
>
> Good luck with the patent, anyway, I guess. I think I'm going to
> patent FK declarations -- according to your paper, they're much more
> ubiquitous, so I can better reap the benefits when I charge royalties
> for their use.
>
> TroyK- Hide quoted text -
>
According to

http://www.patentlawportal.com/information/patentability/what-are-the-equirements-for-patentability.html ,

"In order for the PTO to consider an invention eligible for a patent, it must be novel, nonobvious and possess a utility."

Since foreign keys aren't exactly novel, your admittedly tongue-in- cheek "gem" (that you are "going to patent FK declarations") "betrays" that you are no better informed about patents than database.

Enough said. I have nothing against you and I gladly welcome any constructive, critical input you choose to provide. But please don't attack me. My cdt posting was about a novel, non-obvious technology that has significant utility. It was not about me and certainly not about you.

Rob Received on Thu Jan 03 2008 - 21:47:42 CET