Re: some information about anchor modeling

> I began the thread, “The Original Version” on May 26th of 2010 on this
> user group. In this thread, the following three facts were portrayed
> about the paper “Anchor Modeling – An agile modeling technique using
> the sixth normal form for structurally and temporally evolving data”:
>
> a) My database solution introduces a new idea that enables the
> modeling and maintaining
> of knowledge about the states of objects (and relationships) and
> changing of the
> knowledge about entities (and relationships). This enables
> solutions of databases of a
> general character . The existing database theory, in contrast,
> deals with simple and
> static databases.
>
> b) My database solution introduces and enables the construction and
> maintenance of a
> “history of changes”. My work gives the first complete solution of
> the “history”
> problem.

Are you familiar with the work by one Nikos Lorentzos ? I have a book in my library that was published 2003, summarizing his approach.

And since you claim that your solution is "complete", I reckon you also know what to do about and how to deal with, say, cyclic point types ?

> d) My solution introduces only one operation with data, and that is
> the addition of new
> data to the database. There is no deleting or updating of data in
> the database. This
> solution, therefore, controls redundancy

Wait a sec. Just because you allow only additions in your databases, implies that it is impossible to have redundancy in your databases ?

> e) Note that there are some existing theories about changes, but that
> all of them use
> undefined terms like “the world”, “the situation of the world”,
> “the state of the world”,
> “states of affairs”, etc.

"Closed WORLD assumption", anybody ?

> In contrast to this, my solution models
> only changes of entities
> and relationships, which are terms that are defined.

No kidding. Are they ? Received on Sun Jul 22 2012 - 00:29:33 CEST