Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr14.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!88885bfe!not-for-mail From: "Brian Selzer" Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory References: <1158372047.852132.130270@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1158411539.868369.75730@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Columns without names Lines: 33 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1830 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.73.73.118 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr14.news.prodigy.com 1158455629 ST000 68.73.73.118 (Sat, 16 Sep 2006 21:13:49 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 21:13:49 EDT Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com X-UserInfo1: SCSGG_KGPBUGST@[N[O@_WH@YR_B@EXLLBWLOOAFBATBTSUBYFWEAE[YJLYPIWKHTFCMZKVMB^[Z^DOBRVVMOSPFHNSYXVDIE@X\BUC@GTSX@DL^GKFFHQCCE\G[JJBMYDYIJCZM@AY]GNGPJD]YNNW\GSX^GSCKHA[]@CCB\[@LATPD\L@J\\PF]VR[QPJN Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 01:13:49 GMT Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.theory:44952 "JOG" wrote in message news:1158411539.868369.75730@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > David Cressey wrote: >> "JOG" wrote in message >> news:1158372047.852132.130270@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... >> >> > These are potentially different statements to those such as "There is a >> > person, Sally" because the latter is stating "There is a person where >> > name:Sally". The values held in the former assertions have no >> > discernable attribute name - rather than a tuple such as { >> > (name:Sally), (age:28)} I just have { (7) } or { (b) }. >> >> Actually, "7" is the name of a number, and not the number itself. > > Is it? Could you expand on that, as I'm not sure there isn't a > difference? Is that the same for the letter b? I think at some level I > am mulling over the concept of atomicity (or non-decomposability) here, > and how a domain might be defined as a relation itself. > "7" is one possible representation for a number. "00000111b" is another possible representation for the same number. "b" is one possible representation for a letter. "98" is another possible representation for the same letter; "0x62" is another. I don't think a domain can be defined as a relation because the definition would be circular. On the other hand, you could possibly have a domain of relations.