Re: Negative Numbers in "Identity" or" Autonumber" fields
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:28:16 GMT
Message-ID: <4kiMh.47786$DN.2818_at_pd7urf2no>
>>Marshall wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 21, 4:00 am, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>>Marshall wrote:
>>
>>>>>On Mar 20, 10:31 am, "JOG" <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>[...] Nothing in a
>>>>>>proposition should ever be hidden from the user. Propositions come
>>
>>>>>>from outside of the logical layer after all. If an attribute is an
>>
>>>>>>identifier then it clearly impacts on identifying items in the real
>>>>>>world.
>>
>>>>>I buy the "nothing should be hidden" argument, but I can't
>>>>>decide if a domain that only supports equality is hiding
>>>>>anything or not.
>>
>>>>It has to have at least one possible representation.
>>
>>>Can you elaborate? Why does it need at least one?
>>>What breaks if it doesn't?
>>
>>How does one express any literal without at least one possible
>>representation?
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:28:16 GMT
Message-ID: <4kiMh.47786$DN.2818_at_pd7urf2no>
Marshall wrote:
> On Mar 21, 8:28 am, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote: >
>>Marshall wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 21, 4:00 am, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>>Marshall wrote:
>>
>>>>>On Mar 20, 10:31 am, "JOG" <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>[...] Nothing in a
>>>>>>proposition should ever be hidden from the user. Propositions come
>>
>>>>>>from outside of the logical layer after all. If an attribute is an
>>
>>>>>>identifier then it clearly impacts on identifying items in the real
>>>>>>world.
>>
>>>>>I buy the "nothing should be hidden" argument, but I can't
>>>>>decide if a domain that only supports equality is hiding
>>>>>anything or not.
>>
>>>>It has to have at least one possible representation.
>>
>>>Can you elaborate? Why does it need at least one?
>>>What breaks if it doesn't?
>>
>>How does one express any literal without at least one possible
>>representation?
> > > > Okay, sure, yes, that's a point. But that's more of a structural > objection than a functional one. What breaks if a type doesn't > have literals? ...
Closure, possibly?
p Received on Wed Mar 21 2007 - 23:28:16 CET