Re: The term "theory" as in "database theory"

On Jan 26, 1:24 pm, Bernard Peek <b..._at_shrdlu.com> wrote:
> In message <1169836825.076438.178..._at_v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, dawn
> <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> writes
>
> >I have been working on a question related to the term "theory" and
> >decided I first should get a better idea of what this term means to
> >others. Below is the dictionary.com list of definitions. Which of the
> >following comes closest to the use of the term "theory" in this ng as
> >in "database theory", or is there another someone wants to provide?
> >Thanks in advance. --dawn

> It seems that you are approaching this from the wrong direction. The
> newsgroup's name is comp.databases.theory and it's up to each individual
> contributor to decide whether their posts are relevant.

I wasn't actually angling it on whether a post was relevant. I would like to know what the discipline is all about, since it seems I'm might be misunderstanding it.

> But they can be
> relevant to any plausible definition of the word. The word is a given.
> The meaning of the word is not.

Is there a "discipline" or field of study called "database theory"? If so, how does it define itself? What is its scope? The question of "what is theory" is just a part of that, but I really would like to understand what it is for a number of reasons. Only one of these reasons is that I've been called to task for not appreciating theory or database theory (when I sure think I do, otherwise I would not care enough to chat about it, I could just write it off). Any help in understanding this term is appreciated. If all of these definitions are equally fine for our purposes, then I can work with that too, but I wasn't sure that was the case.

Thanks. --dawn

> --
> Bernard Peek
> back in search of cognoscenti
Received on Fri Jan 26 2007 - 22:32:02 CET