Re: How to normalize this?
From: James K. Lowden <jklowden_at_speakeasy.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:23:09 -0500
Message-Id: <20130214192309.8ebe028b.jklowden_at_speakeasy.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:23:09 -0500
Message-Id: <20130214192309.8ebe028b.jklowden_at_speakeasy.net>
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:47:27 -0800 (PST)
Derek Asirvadem <derek.asirvadem_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> There is no point quoting one, or the other, or all five, sentences
> in which he used the term. Doing that would be considering the
> sentences in isolation.
The simple fact is that any sentence *can* be considered isolation. That is how formal logic proceeds, sentence by sentence.
> Codd's "time-varying relations" are specifically about consistency.
That sentence is false, because the term "time-varying relations" refers to concepts other than consistency.
Happy to be of service.
--jkl Received on Fri Feb 15 2013 - 01:23:09 CET