Re: ID field as logical address
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 16:28:40 -0300
paul c wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:
>> Tuples as data types and data values are perfectly fine. What's wrong >> with them? >> ...
> I don't know that doing so is some kind of theoretical error. Since
> they are used to define relations, then presumably a single tuple could
> be an attribute value. However, when we already have relations and a
> set of relation operators, doing so seems superfluous.
> (I have often mused to myself about sets of tuples, constituting a
> bastard attribute that is unnamed, which may have uses, but it wouldn't
> be allowed in Codd's model.)
If it is unnamed, how would you refer to it? Names are important things. Received on Fri May 29 2009 - 21:28:40 CEST