[AccessD] 2 quick questions

I think I am going to throw my hat into the ring here.

First, Arthur, if you are going to argue Codd's relational theories as
being 'law', instead of THEORY, then shouldn't you be arguing that we
should be using Dataphor, instead of discussing how we are using systems
not conforming to his theory, in ways that also don't conform to his
theories?  

Secondly, the idea of intelligent keys crosses one VERY important line.
Computers do not THINK like humans.  The line being crossed is trying to
make a computer store and retrieve data the way a human thinks it should
be stored and retrieved.  

Let's take your spark plug example.

Batch - Lot - Item

What's the difference between 01-001-0001 and 0001-0001-0001.  To a
human, both of those are the same, it's still batch 1, lot 1, and item
1.  To a computer, they are two completely separate values.  Granted,
you can make logic, to 'format' your intelligent key 'properly', but
doesn't it make more sense to have logic to PRESENT an 'intelligent' key
to the user, instead of using that 'intelligent key' in the system
itself?  The reason there is a line between how a computer works, and
how a human works, is because both groups 'think' differently.  So
calling a string of characters an 'intelligent key' for a computer is
just as absurd as expecting a human to respond to their name display in
binary (from Unicode characters).

Drew

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Arthur Fuller
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 8:15 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] 2 quick questions

I refuse to participate in this conversation. Apparently, few if any of
you
(I reserve one exception) have never read Codd or Date etc. Yes, it is
convenient to use an AutoNumber (or in SQL parlance Identity, or in
Oracle
parlance Sequence) to uniquely identify rows within a relation. Of
course it
is, and that's why most of us use it, but is it correct? Actually, I
think
not, atlthough sometimes it shall suffice: given the case of thousands
of
eggs hatched by hundreds of chickens daily, it may not make sense to
give
them Intelligent Keys, but given another case such as serial-numbered
automobile parts, then non-autonumbered PKs make serious sense.

I am not on one side or the other of this discussion. Rather, I am on
both
sides, and can see the sense in both sides of this discussion. When we
are
discussing eggs, autonumber may seem correct; when discussing fuel
injectors, then serial numbers and batch numbers are important, and
hence
PKs should identify these objects intelligently, not autonumerically.

A.

The information contained in this transmission is intended only for the person or entity 
to which it is addressed and may contain II-VI Proprietary and/or II-VI Business 
Sensitive material. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender 
immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. 
You are notified that any review, retransmission, copying, disclosure, dissemination, 
or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons 
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.