Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!postnews.google.com!i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Pickie" <keith.johnson@datacom.co.nz>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory
Subject: Re: Operationalize orthogonality
Date: 5 Jun 2006 17:40:55 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <1149554455.416777.89860@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
References: <447ab7bd$0$31643$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
   <1148917119.234586.125530@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1148938551.918883.18840@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
   <rQ6fg.34544$YI5.13890@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>
   <1149114314.326463.249800@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <jxrfg.36177$YI5.1326@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>
   <1149132021.796581.136440@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
   <1149152637.104394.142980@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <rzBfg.15961$A26.371074@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.175.143.143
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1149554463 19797 127.0.0.1 (6 Jun 2006 00:41:03 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 00:41:03 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <rzBfg.15961$A26.371074@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 DNZWGPX1
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=202.175.143.143;
   posting-account=TVzGOw0AAADTMtBUe2p40gCsKJO7CTse
Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.theory:41048


Bob Badour wrote:
> Tony D wrote:
>
> > You're missing the type generator out, which is crucial. Please reread
> > my post from 12:24 am on 31st May, which hopefully makes the
> > progression clear. If not, post a reply there and I'll try explaining
> > anything that isn't clear.
> >
> > Pickie wrote:
> >
> >>OK.  Start again.
> >>
> >>Given a tabular database which only supports the boolean type (a value
> >>can only be TRUE or FALSE).  How, using rows and that boolean type, can
> >>I define another type?
>
> Tony, you are wasting your time with that one. Prolonged pick use has
> damaged his brain.
>
> If he cannot figure out how to construct other types out of bits, he has
> no business in computing.

Really, tsk tsk tsk.  Anyone other than a complete ignorant understands
the difference between the logical (booleans) and the physical (bits).