Re: Sensible and NonsenSQL Aspects of the NoSQL Hoopla

On 2013-09-03, vldm10 <vldm10_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dana utorak, 3. rujna 2013. 06:02:38 UTC+2, korisnik James K. Lowden napisao je:
...
>> If you really care there were four B's, count them
>>
>> B 4
>>
>> Here "4" is a quantity, not an instrument of navigation. You can find
>
> Here "4" is not a quantity, "4" is similar to "3". "3" is an
> identifier. Maybe the following example will shed more light on what
> this is all about.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUcYSR-Xl_E&feature=related

Smart dogs notwithstanding, 4 is a quantity. We understand quantities, they are what we get when we count things, and that is the context of the statement you are arguing with. For the dog "3" is an identifier, rather that the ordinal we might have expected, but that's in a different context, and therefore irrelevant.

...

> What Codd did not do that is that he did not say that he copied Gottlob
> Frege. The Relational Model is copy of Frege's theory. And this is a bad
> copy, because Codd did not understand completely Frege's theory.

If it's a bad copy, maybe it's not a copy at all. Are you saying that Codd deliberately copied the theory and deliberately chose to not acknowledge it?

...

> In fact Frege's theory is much more general than the RM.

And therefore not necessarily appropriate to data management. In fact,
>> Lots of things are missing from RM. That's the point.

Eric

-- 
ms fnd in a lbry