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

On Feb 5, 9:03 pm, "Marshall" <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 5, 5:29 pm, "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So, it makes sense to me for us to appeal to KISS throughout the
> > software development process, but not to Occam's Razor.
>
> Is such a tiny distinction worth a thread this long? Is it worth
> making in the first place?

Yes, for me it was. That doesn't mean that others think it important (and it sounds like you don't).

After about the 4th time I read about Occam's razor being used as if it were some type of explanation for why the relational model was better than any other could be (have you heard such claims too?), I thought it was worth trying to figure out what this argument was about as I did not understand how Occam's Razor applied to database theory at all.

>From the responses so far, it sounds like this is a false argument for
the RM as "the one true model for data" that some seem to think it is (there might be other arguments too, but this is one that I have seen). If any of us hear this argument again, we (at least I) can be more confident understanding that it is a bogus argument. --dawn Received on Tue Feb 06 2007 - 04:29:33 CET