Re: what are keys and surrogates?
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 18:23:57 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e6ba98c3-bc53-45a6-87c6-ea11e8c88616_at_p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 10, 1:22 am, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 8:07 am, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 9, 1:25 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > This issue goes away if we relax 1NF and allow attributes that are
> > > lists or relations. This gives us nested structures. (Nested relations
> > > are not particularly controversial around here.)
>
> > In addition to my previous post, I wish to add another comment
> > regarding my suspicion with RVAs. The tuples of a relation are
> > supposed to represent facts, but what does it mean when a relation
> > merely represents a value?
>
> The question is meaningless. The distinction you are drawing
> does not exist.
In what sense do tuples of an RVA represent propositions in *the* UoD?
> > Isn't the RM meant to have some close
> > association with FOPL?
>
> Yes.
>
> > It seems to me there is a fundamental difference between
>
> > a) a large collection of propositions relevant to a particular UoD;
> > and
>
> > b) a composite data structure such as an AST which simply
> > "is what it is"
>
> This is an illusion. There is no difference.
Hmmm. Unfortunately you didn't respond to my last paragraph which was more tangible.