Re: Is a function a relation?
From: David BL <davidbl_at_iinet.net.au>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <b0dd04c2-283c-4e11-9ac0-5ac5f85f7a0b_at_h18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <b0dd04c2-283c-4e11-9ac0-5ac5f85f7a0b_at_h18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
On Jun 29, 11:01 pm, Cimode <cim..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> <<
> The cardinality of un-ary relation subtype can *not* exceed the
> Given a relation type (i.e. schema), there are a number (possibly
> infinite) of relation values that conform to that type. The type and
> the values of that type are all abstract and carry almost no
> information. >>
> cardinality of the relation supertype. That is a constraint imposed
> by how a relation is defined.
Sure. Why did you say that? Received on Tue Jun 30 2009 - 03:51:53 CEST