Re: On Normalisation & the State of Normalisation
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 21:12:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <84bcf07f-9196-45c5-822e-07c1f6ea0f1a_at_googlegroups.com>
I would be pleased to take up any arguments you (plural, the 1%) may have, as long as you reference the science that has been established in the industry, that is used by implementers, the 99%, that you allege that you serve.
Second, although I have entertained it in the past, I will no longer entertain the _justification_ of the long and winding methods that fail to reject data models that fail either 3NF or RM Compliance, because their result is failure. Dealing your "definitions" and ridiculously long and winding methods, that fail anyway, is a huge waste of time.
You are of course, free to flagellate amongst yourselves, before you come up with something relevant to submit.
Let's keep the focus on the task, does the given data model
- Is it "5NF" ?
- Is the reference to SCGHNFRDB valid ?
- Is it Relational ?
Cheers
Derek
Received on Sat Feb 07 2015 - 06:12:25 CET