 | |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Demo: John, Mary and R2D2 -
11-09-2004
, 09:10 PM
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
From thread titled "Relational vs network vs hierarchic databases" Browne: Perhaps you should try finding something that _can't_ be easily modelled in a relational model, instead. Neo: How would one represent the following without redundancy or NULLs? john like mary. mary like john. (john like mary) because (mary like john). bob hit mary on elbow. john hit bob on shoulder during lunch. (john hit bob on shoulder during lunch) because (bob hit mary on elbow). Marshall: ... *representation* per se isn't that big of a problem. Neo: Then please post it using RM observing good practices such as avoiding NULLs and redundancy. Marshall: With regards to what set of operations? Otherwise I'm going to stick with my "string" answer, because it's easiest. |
// Who did mary bite?
// Finds r2d2.
SELECT2 mary.bite = %;
// Who hit mary?
// Finds r2d2.
SELECT2 %.hit = mary;
// What did r2d2 do to mary?
// Finds hit
SELECT2 r2d2.% = mary;
// What kind of thing likes john?
// Finds horse (not mary).
SELECT2 %.cls=thing & %.inst=(%.like=john);
// Why did r2d2 hit mary?
// Finds mary.bite=r2d2 before breakfast.
SELECT2 (r2d2.hit=mary).because = %;
// What did john do to r2d2 after dinner?
// Finds reboot.
SELECT2 john.%=r2d2 @after=dinner;
Let me know if you need me to convert XDb2's script to RM's equivalent
normalized/NULL-less schema in a manner similar to that in thread
titled "Demo: Db for Dummies".
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Let me know if you need me to convert XDb2's script to RM's equivalent normalized/NULL-less schema in a manner similar to that in thread titled "Demo: Db for Dummies". |
Some money would be nice though.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
#4
| |||||
| |||||
|
|
From OT "A Normalization Question", Marshall wrote: I consider it telling that all the examples you come up with are nonsensical. WTF does "John obeys army" mean? How come your missing-data examples involve people with two different color eyes? "'brown' is a string" is a proposition? |
Quote:
|
Have you ever had a job that involved data management? |
Quote:
|
Clearly not, which is why you don't have any examples that make any sense; you have no experience with the actual domain under discussion. |
www.xdb2.com/example/default.asp don't make any sense to you?
Quote:
|
Even the question of whether pizza toppings are ordered or not makes more sense than the stuff you come up with. |
Quote:
|
Instead of making up new meanings for existing well-defined terms, howsabout you come up with a way to solve problems *people actually have* that's better than what they have now? |
posted at the start of this thread. Wouldn't you say it is better than
using strings?
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
From OT "A Normalization Question", Marshall wrote: I consider it telling that all the examples you come up with are nonsensical. WTF does "John obeys army" mean? How come your missing-data examples involve people with two different color eyes? "'brown' is a string" is a proposition? Sensical examples are for limited data models. Have you ever had a job that involved data management? Clearly not, which is why you don't have any examples that make any sense; you have no experience with the actual domain under discussion. Could you tell me which of the examples listed at www.xdb2.com/example/default.asp don't make any sense to you? Even the question of whether pizza toppings are ordered or not makes more sense than the stuff you come up with. Here is a pizza example (www.xdb2.com/Example/Ex108.asp). Instead of making up new meanings for existing well-defined terms, howsabout you come up with a way to solve problems *people actually have* that's better than what they have now? Try the one in the thread titled "Demo: Db for Dummies" or the one posted at the start of this thread. Wouldn't you say it is better than using strings? |
your reply all this time?
BTW, the usual meaning of "OT" as an abbreviation is "off-topic."
Marshall
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
From OT "A Normalization Question", Marshall wrote: I consider it telling that all the examples you come up with are nonsensical. WTF does "John obeys army" mean? How come your missing-data examples involve people with two different color eyes? "'brown' is a string" is a proposition? Sensical examples are for limited data models. |
XDb2: the DBMS for the demented and insane.
It is a gift. Really. Please do not send me any money for it, as
Hugo would get jealous. You really should pay him first.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Marshall: Your belief [that thinking about how you think results in understanding intelligence] is invalid. It's been tried many times; it doesn't work. Neo: Are you reading what you are writing? |
became aware of the impossibility of introspection as a valid tool for
understanding the nature of intelligence while aquiring a degree in
psychology from UC Berkeley, which I did on the side while also
pursuing a computer science degree. Introspection (and intuition) fail
even when applied to simple cognitive tasks.
You brain is hardwired to present you with the belief that you know
what's going on, and that your perception is valid. In cases where
incomplete input is available, it actually makes stuff up on a
best-guess basis and still presents it as fact. Anyone who ever saw a
pretty girl at a distance that turned out to be a mailbox when you got
close has experienced this phenomenon.
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.