Re: The word "symbol"

From: x <x_at_not-exists.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 08:53:05 +0300
Message-ID: <de17o3$4f6$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org>


"Roy Hann" <specially_at_processed.almost.meat> wrote in message news:r6ydnT4Ya7wOo57eRVnyuQ_at_pipex.net...
> "x" <x_at_not-exists.org> wrote in message
> news:ddvebm$grc$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org...
> > Ok as long as one (who isn't a part of that narrow formalized world)
does
> > not forget it is not.

> If the narrow formalized world is fit for its intended purpose then no one
> who is not part of it should ever have any reason to comment on it (or
even
> be aware of it). And if it is not fit for purpose all bets are off.

I used the word "part" as "a piece of", not as "involved in". I agree that for the RDBMS, a tuple is a tuple, not a symbol.

But for the people it is a symbol.
Symbols are used for communication.
If a database does not have symbols, it can be used only as a game. Received on Thu Aug 18 2005 - 07:53:05 CEST

Original text of this message