Re: some information about anchor modeling

From: vldm10 <vldm10_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:04:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <96fb2d13-67e6-4ba6-ae3b-fc2f70c0d913_at_googlegroups.com>

Hi Derek

I divide databases into two kinds: Simple databases and General databases. See my paper “Database design and data model founded on concept constructs and knowledge constructs” section 1 at http://www.dbdesign11.com/ My papers and solutions are about General databases. Existing database theory is mainly what I am calling simple databases. RM/T also belongs to simple databases. What is the difference between General and Simple databases? I'll answer this question in the following way, I'll write what was solved in my papers, and has not been resolved in the Simple database. So this is the list:

1. I introduce effective solution which decompose concepts, relations, and files to the corresponding binary data structures. This decomposition is related to Simple databases. See “Some ideas about a new Data Model” Section 4 from May15, 2006 at http://www.dbdesign10.com/ Note that the conditions for binary decomposition determine how to design db. In other words I do not need normal forms; I need appropriate conditions that will determine, from the beginning and immediately, a good db design. I wrote “Today’s database theory holds that an entity (that is, the corresponding relation) must be normalized. Contrastingly, in our data model the general case is that the entity has intrinsic properties. This means that properties of the entity take values freely. This entity corresponds to a relation which has mutually independent attributes. Once again, this is a general case in database design. If the database designer needs to introduce constraints in his application, then he needs to define those limitations on the mentioned entity with intrinsic properties. For example, he can define functional dependencies, after he has defined the entity (in the general case). “See Semantic Databases and Semantic Machines” section 5.1(2) and 5.9. at http://www.dbdesign11.com/ Of course it will be the best to use constraints only on the level of binary (decomposed) structures.

These conditions show that 6nf can not solve problems. For example, if you have a relation with 5 mutually independent attributes then 6nf can not decompose this relation. However, in my model, mutually independent attributes are basic condition for the binary decomposition.

2. I introduce effective solution which decompose concepts, relations, and files to the corresponding binary data structures. This decomposition is related to General databases. This decomposition immediately follows from my results published in 2005. For more details See my paper “Database design and data model founded on concept constructs and knowledge constructs” section 4.2.9 at http://www.dbdesign11.com/

3. My solution enables for any data, that we can determine who has constructed that data. These structures are designed so that no one can knock them down. So this db design enables the following: It is always possible to determine who had stored any data in the db.

4. In my solution I have introduced completely new techniques. These techniques allow databases to maintain the history of events. They also allow some of the other skills specific to general databases. Some of these techniques are as follows:

a)  Immutable identifiers;
b)  n-temporal model;
c)  Fully supported the work with states of entities and relationships;
d)  Working with multiple identifiers on a single object. These identifiers are related to each other;
e) Minimal set of events that describe the data in the database;

5. My solution is the first, which totally without exception allows a database that fully maintains the history of events.

6. My solution constructs databases, which are supported by the Internet. So on line work is immediately supported with these databases and all data from the database is immediately accessible. As for internet supported databases, the following two advantages of my models are important: a) History of any data
b) The ability to accurately identify who is responsible for certain data, including incorrect information.

7. In my papers the concept is well defined. Also, all other things related to the concepts are defined. To understand the importance of introducing the definition of the concept in my papers note the following: In a famous paper by P. Chen "The Entity-Relationship Model - Toward a Unified View of Data," there is nothing at all about the concepts. In ER model, there is no definition of the concept, although this model is called the conceptual model. This is the most important part in my model. My model is primarily conceptual. I introduced the concepts of state; I also introduced identifiers, events and knowledge into the concepts. Russell's paradox is resolved. The binary (atomic) concepts have been introduced. I think this is the first real conceptual model. Note that this model was done in my paper from 2008.

8. My model does not require data warehouses. It is alone sufficient. The reason for this is that any data that has ever been entered into the database is stored permanently in the database. Another reason is that my database is supported online. So I can combine my data with data from internet.  

9. My model is not temporal db. My database is event-oriented, which is much more general, than temporal db.

1. My solution as mentioned above is based on concepts. I actually use a lot, G. Frege’s theory. For this theory, I have added a part, which I think was missed. This part is about identification. I expanded Leibniz's Law, see section 5.6, in my paper "Semantic databases and semantic machines". In connection with Leibniz's Law, intrinsic object properties form an object as an independent entity in relation to other entities. Extrinsic object properties form an object as a dependent in relation to other entities. Also, I did a lot of other things related to identification. Identification of individuals and their link to pluralities is resolved in my model. This enables databases that contain individual objects. Identification is defined as mind - world link. So the concepts and identification are two mind-world links. The relation (3.3.3), see, section 3.3, from my paper “Database design and data model founded on concept and knowledge constructs” is important because it defines the relationship between concepts and identification, that is, it determines the relationship between the relation of satisfy and the corresponding identification. “
2. My model provides a simple and direct mapping between different data models. In the case of Simple databases, identifiers of entities or relationships define the mapping between the corresponding binary structures. In the case of General databases, identifiers of states of entities or relationships define the mapping between the corresponding binary structures.
3. Knowledge is introduced in a new way and has great application in my model. Knowledge in my model consists only of facts. The facts in my model are always atomic. The facts in my model are generated from binary structures, they are almost always determined by relation (3.3.3) mentioned in this post (see case 10. above). Another important thing about knowledge is that knowledge is structured. One data can have considerable associated knowledge, for example: Knowledge1 can be: who and when he said that this attribute has this value in the real world. Knowledge2 can be: who and when received this information.(who from IT department) Knowledge3 can be: who and when entered this data into the db Knowledge 4 can be: who and when transfer this data into another db So just for one fact, associated knowledge can be substantial. Of Course you can add more knowledge to this data if you need it. (This example demonstrate knowledge, stored in db, just for one data

I distinguish fact and factual sentence. Also a subject is aware of facts. Knowledge is set of facts, so subject is aware of knowledge; I mean knowledge is not just some stored facts. See my paper “Semantic databases and semantic machines” section 1.

Structured knowledge you can see in my paper, "Database design and data model founded on concept and knowledge constructs" sections 3.6 - 3.9. It is important to realize that knowledge is distributed in the structures, so you can add different structures of knowledge to one data. It is also important to realize that knowledge, which is introduced in this way, is much more general than "that" what some have called "metadata." I personally think that db design that uses the idea of "metadata" is incorrect and very bad.

---

As seen here Codd’s RM/T paper does not address these areas at all.

Those above 12 points is a rough division, there are other details. I completed very complex projects using the above elements. Real strength of this model can be seen by applying it for enormous and complex db application.  

I do not know if you're familiar with the semantic web and the corresponding software, which is led by the W3C.

This is about the theory and software for data on the Web.

It seems to me that my solution is much better. My theory on the concepts, semantics, and possibility to maintain complete history of events, clearly show the benefits of my solution. My model allows you to work with individuals (objects) and with pluralities. It enables the organization of data using binary (atomic) structure. Apparently the atomic structures can be distributed to various web resources.

I will post one more message and then we can analyze an example. It will be good to understand example 8 from my paper "Database design and data model founded on concept and knowledge constructs”, section 6.5. If you understand that example, then you can create your own db application.

Vladimir Odrljin Received on Wed Feb 13 2013 - 19:04:14 CET