Home -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> dumb terminology question: candidate key

dumb terminology question: candidate key

From: Marshall Spight <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com>
Date: 14 Jul 2005 22:09:28 -0700
Message-ID: <1121404168.135954.207810_at_g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> 





Does anyone have any insight or information on the origin
of the term "candidate key"? It seems like a standout bad
term in a field full of not-very-good terms.



A "candidate" is something that aspires to a particular position,
but hasn't attained it yet. So the term suggests that we're
*considering* declaring this set of attributes to be unique,
but we're not sure yet. We'll get back to you once we're sure.



What advantage does this term have over the simpler term "key"?
Any reason we just shouldn't all say key? We don't say "primary
candidate key" or "foreign candidate key" do we?




Marshall
Received on Fri Jul 15 2005 - 07:09:28 CEST












Original text of this message