Re: Full Name as Composite Attribute
Date: 28 Mar 2005 20:44:46 -0800
Message-ID: <1112071486.928942.60850_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
I would like to add a few thoughts about the composite attribute
"Address" from previous thread. "Address" can be defined as a
relation among the entities: State, City, StreetName, Building and
Apartment. There are State or City services which initialize a new
street or building or house in the system or delete some of these
entities from the system and there are technical procedures for these
actions. These databases are used by the Post Office, Water, Electric,
Gas, Phone companies, some courts etc. These are big systems that need
to know about all the buildings in one street, (i.e. a relationship).
These systems require a list of streets, a list of buildings, a list of
cities and their relationships. Here, the address should be treated as
a relationship.
We can also treat Address as an entity and form a relationship between
the entity Person and the entity Address.
On the other hand, we can form an entity Person with a PersonName as an
attribute and an address as a composite attribute. Here, we have an
entity with attributes.
We can see that the solution as relationship is more powerful; it is
not just a set of data. Just to mention two reasons why this is so: The
Relation solution can support the fact that one person has 2 or more
addresses. It also can support the case in which one person had one
address in two different time periods. The other advantage of this
solution is that it presents a clearer picture about reality, regarding
our knowledge of it.
On the other hand, there is an advantage of this entity approach for
simpler systems; we don't need to build some complex and expensive
solutions.
Regarding the "Full Name" composite attribute, the situation can be
more complex, because giving names can be a very complex procedure.
Here is one example; we are supposed to create a DB with Donald Duck,
Mickey Mouse and some other Walt Disney characters. We can put them
into tables, create tables with them, create some of their
relationships, i.e. - we can create a Relational DB. But, although
people know much about these characters, even their personalities, they
are not from the real world; Walt Disney made them up. So, there is no
Conceptual Model because there is no mapping from the real world for
these full names.
In fact Frege's theory about names can explain similar examples. I
think that those members of this group who are good at Semantics and
Mathematical Logic can give us more valuable comments about theory of
names.
Vladimir Odrljin Received on Tue Mar 29 2005 - 06:44:46 CEST
