Jump to content

Talk:Domain-key normal form

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TinucherianBot (talk | contribs) at 11:52, 26 September 2008 (Autoassessment for WP:COMP : ( FAQ ) : (Plugin++) Added {{WikiProject Computing}}, class=Stub, auto=yes.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconComputing Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
WikiProject iconDatabases (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Databases, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Highest?

Is this a higher normal form truly? The example simply shows a combination of two attributes in one field, something that wouldn't even pass 1NF if you simply rewrote it as an array stored in a field, which it basically is. Gigs (talk) 05:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; based on the First normal form article, it's not 1NF, since evilness and eccentricity are two attributes being stuffed into one column. I wonder, what about a table with an “upper bound” column and a “lower bound” column, with the constraint that the upper bound is greater? That seems to have the same problem as the given example (two columns with an interdependent constraint), but would be much simpler (assuming I'm correct that such a two-column constraint violates DKNF). Also the solution is less obvious in this case. (My guess would be that you'd store the total range — upper bound minus lower bound — instead of the upper bound, and say the range must be positive; that'd pass DKNF now, right?) Luke Maurer (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]