Re: Fails Relational, Fails Third Normal Form

Op donderdag 5 februari 2015 12:24:55 UTC+1 schreef Derek Asirvadem:
>
> > > I declare:
> > > ____the proposed data model [A] fails 3NF____
> > > and in general:
> > > ____the proposed data model [A] is not Normalised____
> >
> > For the private definitions of 3NF and Normalised that you seem to use and have not yet made explicit, this might al very well be true. Hard to say.
>
> ???
> I do not have private Definitions.
>
> ???
> 3NF: I have always, and severally stated, Codd's definition 1970 and 1971. I quoted it the other day in the Theoretician Crippled thread, and you seem to have accepted it.

Let's focus a little on this. As you know I did not accept it as the full and exact description of Codd's definition of 3NF. Your claim is that it is different form the standard textbook definition. That can be easily established by comparing them. Would you mind quoting the full and precise definition of 3NF by Codd?

Btw. that reminds me: have you already found a concrete example of a statement that Gary Boetticher makes in the movie you referred to where he uses standard normalization terminology in a non-standard way? You accused him of doing that, and even mentioned it as a reason to call him a fraud. You seemed to be moving towards providing some evidence of that, and then stopped.

• Jan Hidders