Re: Mixing OO and DB

On Feb 18, 10:27 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> JOG wrote:
> > On Feb 18, 5:10 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >>JOG wrote:
>
> >>>On Feb 18, 2:54 pm, "Brian Selzer" <br..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>"JOG" <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote in message
>
> >>>>news:9098871a-bd2c-4385-b547-542f38b2055a_at_34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>>>On Feb 15, 2:31 am, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>On Feb 14, 10:38 pm, JOG <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>>[snip]
>
> >>>>>>>On Feb 14, 3:52 am, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>"todays lottery numbers: 23, 34, 17"
> >>>>>>>"experimental results: 23, 34, 17"
>
> >>>>>>>All written down on a bit of paper - same values discussed, but
> >>>>>>>different data. Agree or disagree?
>
> >>>>>>I agree. Yes, same values but different data
>
> >>>>>>>I ask this because if we can distinguish data and values, we must then
> >>>>>>>determine /how/ they are different. You state it is by "encoding" but
> >>>>>>>the two lines above are encoded in the same manner as far as I am
> >>>>>>>concerned, so that cannot be the difference between the two concepts.
> >>>>>>>That is unless your "Encodings" equates to my notion of "Facts", and
> >>>>>>>we are thus agreeing loudly, using different definitions of those
> >>>>>>>terms.
>
> >>>>>>They are the same values and they are encoded in the same manner.
> >>>>>>However they are distinct appearances, hence distinct data.
>
> >>>>>Ok, so we're agreed at least there. Same values with the same
> >>>>>encoding. Yet the first datum is different to the second. The logic
> >>>>>below therefore follows:
>
> >>>>>1) The two items of data discussed have the same values and same
> >>>>>encoding.
>
> >>>>Yes.
>
> >>>Hey Brian. That's good - at least there is consensus there.
>
> >>>>>2) The two items of data can obviously be distinguished (we are agreed
> >>>>>they are not the same data).
>
> >>>>No. They are the same data.
>
> >>>Ok, that I personally find a strange use of the term. You seem to be
> >>>saying that:
>
> >>>P(a, b)
> >>>Q(a, b)
>
> >>>is the same data? To me that looks like the first line is a different
> >>>datum to the second, even though they share the same values.
> >>>Definitely not in your opinion?
>
> >>>>>3) Therefore a datum must possess some attribute outside of its values
> >>>>>and encoding.
>
> >>>>Yes, but not what you think: A fact is supposed to be true.
>
> >>>>Each appearance of a value in a proposition that is supposed to be true is
> >>>>data, but each appearance in the same proposition is the same data.
> >>>>But isn't it also true that at least some combinations of values, such as those
> >>>>combinations of values that appear in a tuple, may also be data?
>
> >>What complete and utter nonsense! Why, oh why, Jim, do you inflict this
> >>on the rest of us?
>
> >>[snip]
>
> > Y'know, I have no idea. I think it must be wishful thinking.
>
> You mentioned the idea of creating a new online resource. Are you still
> pursuing that?

Yes very much so, in between paying the mortgage. I was hoping to paint db theory as a science, but that now seems unrealistic, as the noise generated in this thread might have indicated. Received on Mon Feb 18 2008 - 23:58:44 CET