Re: Database-valued attributes?
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:20:56 -0500
Message-ID: <GLadnaU5LYVh0i-iRVn-tg_at_golden.net>
"Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message
news:bot3ev$oqa$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
> news:EZKdnUmgA62gjiyiRVn-tw_at_golden.net...
> > "Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message
> > news:boquvj$1o30$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> > > "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
> > > news:srWdneQR1as5SC2iRVn-hg_at_golden.net...
> > > > All you have done is describe a data type with a possrep consisting
of
> > two
> > > > RVA's. Such a data type is perfectly acceptable. The equivalent of a
> > > > "database value" with multiple views would be a similar type with
> > multiple
> > > > possreps.
> > >
> > > Q. Do D&D explicitly define what a possiable representaion is. I.e. is
a
> > > poss rep with more than 1 component a tuple of those components, or a
> > list, a set, an array or just 'a thing with components'?
> >
> > It is a possible representation. The remainder is internal.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Can't say I'm happy with such dereliction of definition though. I'd like
to
> see the logical model cover such matters rather than leaving it to be an
> 'internal' matter. Oh well.
Physical independence is not a dereliction. Received on Wed Nov 12 2003 - 16:20:56 CET