Home -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Getting Normal Forms *wrong*. Is there actual disagreement on what 1NF > 3NF means or is this sloppiness or ignorance on authors' parts?

Re: Getting Normal Forms *wrong*. Is there actual disagreement on what 1NF > 3NF means or is this sloppiness or ignorance on authors' parts?

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 02:56:49 GMT
Message-ID: <RP5fm.38147$Db2.23045_at_edtnps83> 






David BL wrote:


> On Aug 8, 8:48 am, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:


> 

>>  I guess this example is not applicable to trapezoids.




> 

> Every trapezoid is a quadrilateral.  The internal angles of a


> quadrilateral always sum to 360 degrees.

> 




It seems you are a subject expert who is not always available to 
somevbody who is tasked witn comng up with a db desiign.  Good for you, 
but so what?  I think anybody who has an app to make, shouldn't have to 
spend forever trying to figure out  what  they don't knowl, nor be told 
that by a kibbizer (no offence intgended, but that could well be the 
circumstance here)f.  What they already know should be the premise(s) of 
their app, no  matter how much more you or a different expert migjht know/.
Received on Sat Aug 08 2009 - 04:56:49 CEST












Original text of this message