Re: Proposal: 6NF

paul c wrote:
> David Cressey wrote:
> > "Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1159707552.227184.276470_at_k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> ..
> >
> > What's your proposal for a systematic way of dealing with missing data?
> >
> >
>
> David, PMFJI, I really do think that an enterprise that is truly
> depending on missing data doesn't have a problem that is limited to its
> db, as it will soon go out of business. Actually, I don't really see
> how one can depend on missing data in general and no systematic solution
> is called for. Heh, also think that the IBM approach is best - namely
> It's Better Manually!
True. Utilization of NULLS has become a norm and therefore people learnt to leave with it. They have learnt to make subjective adjustments when they can not explain incoherent results (I can count how many statistician, accounting, and marketing people are called in datawarehouses to *validate* false counts subjectivity, I have encoutered). A a consequence, a part of subjectivity has been introduced back into validating accuracy of results.

> p
Received on Mon Oct 02 2006 - 15:53:59 CEST