Re: Guessing?
From: David BL <davidbl_at_iinet.net.au>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 20:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <8fe8eda9-2475-4d88-902f-a1a74bd77d11_at_w1g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 20:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <8fe8eda9-2475-4d88-902f-a1a74bd77d11_at_w1g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
On May 28, 11:10 am, paul c <toledoby..._at_ac.ooyah> wrote:
> David BL wrote:
> > On May 28, 10:28 am, paul c <toledoby..._at_ac.ooyah> wrote:
> >>> ...
> >> A DBMS implementation is not concerned with questions of existence.
> >> Hmmm, Principle of Non-Existence?
>
> > I'm only suggesting that a DBMS implementation should respect the
> > possibility that intensional definitions are present.
>
> Isn't it constraints that make intensions concrete?
An intensional definition of a base relvar may allow a user to fully verify its extension recorded in the DB. This is a form of integrity not normally captured by formal integrity constraints enforced by the DBMS. Received on Wed May 28 2008 - 05:48:43 CEST