Re: Binary Relational Modeling call

<< elements are contents of sets, but they are not shown by BRM graph. they should be available for browsing only in user application.>> Are you defining elements of a set through a GUI feature ? That must mean that sets can not be defined if browsing does not exist.

<<binary relations have their name, source set and destination set. they state possible bindings between elements of source and destination sets. Basically, a set can be seen as a table with its fields represented by relations that source from that set. elements are records of that table. here is example:https://sites.google.com/ site/binaryrelationalmodeling/compare-invoic...>> What are you talking about ?

<<those 2 are crutial structural components of BRM. however, notation of uniqueness of elements is welcome to take place in graphs (one-to- one relationship is done in the same way many-to-may relationship is, with intermediate set, but with uniqueness constraint). although i'm aware of importance of uniqueness, uniqueness notation is not specified and programmers have to implement one in the way they find appropriate.>>
Subjective need for uniqueness. I wonder what would happen in a family, if one of the two parents decides to name all or some of the children with the same name.

<<
> the real value of BRM graphs is in its simpleness. its simpleness takes place in complicated definitions. compare BRM definition in SQL to BRM definition in itself:https://sites.google.com/site/binaryrelationalmodeling/compare-brm.png
>>
BRM or whatever you call it is neither simple nor clear. It is an obscure and fuzzy creation of your imagination. Give it up: you are wasting your time. Educate yourself then create a model. Received on Sun Sep 11 2011 - 22:29:49 CEST