Re: Surrogate Keys: an Implementation Issue

"paul c" <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in message news:HN5zg.274778$iF6.97061_at_pd7tw2no...
> David Cressey wrote:
> > "JOG" <jog_at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > news:1154262656.521112.118530_at_b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >> This discussion has illuminated me, and I would like to share that. A
> >> row is of course merely a proposition,
> >
> >
> > A small but important (IMO) correction:
> >
> > A row contains a proposition. That's not quite equivalent to saying
that a
> > row is a proposition.
> >
> >
>
> Or a row stands for a proposition?

How about "the contents of a row stands for a proposition."

>
> (at least most of the time, ie., when the 'row' has at least one
> 'column'! I know that's really nonsense, I was just trying to refer to
> Hugh Darwen's "the king of France is bald" example on dbdebunk.com.)
>

I hear you. This reminds me of DEE and DUM. DEE and DUM are interesting, at least in theory. Received on Tue Aug 01 2006 - 12:34:33 CEST