Re: ID field as logical address

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 11:33:06 -0300
Message-ID: <4a23e630$0$23773$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>


Kevin Kirkpatrick wrote:

> On May 31, 2:12 am, "Walter Mitty" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
>

>>"Brian Selzer" <br..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote in message
>>
>>news:O4mUl.12059$im1.3878_at_nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>
>>>"Walter Mitty" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>news:fv9Ul.1465$Cc1.1327_at_nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>>
>>>>"paul c" <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote in message
>>>>news:vdUTl.29814$PH1.1299_at_edtnps82...
>>>>
>>>>>Just a couple of comments about a post that is unusually vague and fuzzy
>>>>>coming from you, it's tedious to dismantle every sentence, so I mention
>>>>>only a couple:
>>
>>>>I apologize for how vague and fuzzy this topic is.  If my wording is
>>>>vague and fuzzy, my thinking is even more vague and fuzzy.

<snip>

>>>{{L:Smith, F:Mary, Stat:Single, L':Smith, F':Mary, Stat':Divorced}}

>
> What is the poor HR person to do when Mary Smith returns from a week
> long Vegas trip and reports that she'd gotten married on Monday and
> divorced on Friday?

Wouldn't it make more sense to just ask the OP to re-post in comp.databases.vague.fuzzy ? Received on Mon Jun 01 2009 - 16:33:06 CEST

Original text of this message