Re: Resiliency To New Data Requirements
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:52:39 GMT
Message-ID: <Xo%Eg.50202$pu3.587336_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>>Yes, I've read those terms. I do understand the use of "unstructured"
>>within an attribute value, such as an attribute whose value is a
>>document. That doesn't make the whole unstructured. The fact that a
>>database holds music doesn't make the database any less structured.
>>There can be a structured database that includes unstructured attribute
>> values.
>
> The word "structured" here is a waste of time.
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:52:39 GMT
Message-ID: <Xo%Eg.50202$pu3.587336_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
erk wrote:
> dawn wrote: >
>>Yes, I've read those terms. I do understand the use of "unstructured"
>>within an attribute value, such as an attribute whose value is a
>>document. That doesn't make the whole unstructured. The fact that a
>>database holds music doesn't make the database any less structured.
>>There can be a structured database that includes unstructured attribute
>> values.
>
> The word "structured" here is a waste of time.
Why do you folks bother with self-aggrandizing trolls? She has you all chasing your tails.
'Structure' means different things in different contexts. Received on Thu Aug 17 2006 - 16:52:39 CEST