Even funnier, you can't post ANY verifiable RM scripts using a
methodology with a +30 yr history and the help of Pascal. Please
support your assertion by posting the "proper" RM design that
accomplishes the same as XDb2's.

Your conceptions of what is normalized or 1NF within the constructs of
RM are of little consequence as XDb2 models and queries the desired
things. Please post RM's equivalent script/queries.

I'd rather not rattle about normalization. I'd rather focus on actually
demonstrating things. I have already demonstrated XDb2's
scripts/queries for user's problem. Please demonstrate RM's equivalent
script/queries by posting them.

BTW, I have already posted XDb2's solution to model/query the things
desired by user. Please support your assertions by posting RM's
equivalent using whatever you feel is the "correct" method and doesn't
mix "meta data" with "user data".

Why not support your assertion by using the Ultimate DBMS to model a
city and quarterback both named by the string 'Troy'? Assign the string
an attribute "point value" of 15. Then show a query which finds all
things named by a string with the point value of 15. I have already
posted XDb2's solution. Use ANY method in your disposal to do the same.

Neo wrote:
None of those are facts.

Anyway, I'm done here.

You continue to blur important distinctions. Your only purpose in claiming that values
and facts are the same is to confuse and to prevent meaningful discussion.

You are a snake oil salesman preying on the gulliable.

Note to readers: Like Neo, I'm associated with a vendor, so feel free to ignore my
advice. I recommend all readers educate themselves on database matters, to see through
the hype. You can start at Database Debunkings (http://www.dbdebunk.com) as they are not
vendor oriented.

--
Lee Fesperman, FFE Software, Inc. (http://www.firstsql.com)
================================================== ============
* The Ultimate DBMS is here!
* FirstSQL/J Object/Relational DBMS (http://www.firstsql.com)

I am sorry you are leaving without posting any RM solutions to support
your assertions.

Feel free to call somethings "facts" and others "values" within the
context of RM. The important thing is a data model's suitability for a
given scope. While RM has a broad scope and is the appropriate tool in
many applications of today, its scope does not cover everything as RM
expert have been falsely propogating for at least the last few years in
these newsgroups.

Neo wrote:
(Bite my tongue for responding to you! But...) You are indulging in gross distortions.
This is bigger than RM or even database. These concepts apply to logic, mathematics,
language, ... A fact is a logical proposition that is true or not. Try saying this out
loud: Sam has 2 children is true. This makes sense. 1492 is true or 'Troy' is true makes
no sense, without additional context to turn it into a proposition or fact.

I'm just tired of your crap. You refuse to educate yourself.

--
Lee Fesperman, FFE Software, Inc. (http://www.firstsql.com)
================================================== ============
* The Ultimate DBMS is here!
* FirstSQL/J Object/Relational DBMS (http://www.firstsql.com)

I hope you will come back when you are able to apply your definitions,
logic, mathematics, concepts and language to support your assertions by
posting verifiable solutions.