Principle of Orthogonal Design
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:51:15 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <af821fdb-82cf-46f5-9a99-493b37a01d1a@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
I was wondering what your current stances towards the principle of
current design is cdt - info about the POOD is actually pretty sparse
on google, which has not helped my own understanding. I gather that
Date has realigned his opinion - although what to I know not - and
that Darwen rejected the original POOD paper outright given that
McGovern posits that:
R1 { X INTEGER, Y INTEGER }
R2 { A INTEGER, B INTEGER }
violates the principle, whatever the relations' attribute names.
Instinctively it does seem rather odd that a predicates such as:
- on Day:X the shop had noCustomers:Y
- on Roll:A, the dice showed the Number:B
cannot share the same database. Have I interpreted the debate correctly? Any insights or corrections are, as ever, appreciated - POOD is certainly thought provoking, and the concept that an update need not require specifcation of a table name is an interesting one. Received on Tue Jan 08 2008 - 19:51:15 CST