Where to start for a beginner?
Quote from Dave Voorhis on December 18, 2020, 12:24 pmQuote from p c on December 18, 2020, 11:08 amThe mention of applications is important for the same reason data sublanguage is important, system efficiency is lost by a universal relational language that to be logically correct must otherwise reflect the elementary constraint (A ↔ B) because an application becomes logically incorrect without the elementary conflation. Apparently, the intended foundational A-Algebra can't separate the elementary constraint from application representations so presumably neither can complying D-languages.
?
Quote from p c on December 18, 2020, 11:08 amThe mention of applications is important for the same reason data sublanguage is important, system efficiency is lost by a universal relational language that to be logically correct must otherwise reflect the elementary constraint (A ↔ B) because an application becomes logically incorrect without the elementary conflation. Apparently, the intended foundational A-Algebra can't separate the elementary constraint from application representations so presumably neither can complying D-languages.
?
Quote from Erwin on December 18, 2020, 7:38 pmQuote from p c on December 18, 2020, 11:08 amAs this group shows, not everybody is wlling or capable of taking the steps needed to logically conflate conjunction and disjunction.
What a brilliant display of what one stands for.
A pure lexicographical analysis of that sentence [THANK YOU Chris Date for explaining to me the fine art of deconstruction] shows that [the author of the post that this quote came from believes that] :
- the [majority of the] people in this group suffer from some shortcoming when it comes to [their understanding of] the relational model
- that shortcoming consists of, precisely, not being "wlling or capable of taking the steps needed to logically conflate conjunction and disjunction".
So addressing that shortcoming presumably amounts to "stop not being wlling or capable", or iow, "start being wlling or capable" to [take the steps needed to] "logically conflate conjunction and disjunction".
So in the mind of the author of that post, there is apparently benefit to be had by logically conflating conjunction and disjunction.
Maybe the author of that post should first learn about negation and where [and where not] to apply it before lecturing others about [or expressing oneself in extremely derogatory ways about said others' supposed lack of understanding of the differences between] "conjunction and disjunction".
Talk of pathology ...
Quote from p c on December 18, 2020, 11:08 amAs this group shows, not everybody is wlling or capable of taking the steps needed to logically conflate conjunction and disjunction.
What a brilliant display of what one stands for.
A pure lexicographical analysis of that sentence [THANK YOU Chris Date for explaining to me the fine art of deconstruction] shows that [the author of the post that this quote came from believes that] :
- the [majority of the] people in this group suffer from some shortcoming when it comes to [their understanding of] the relational model
- that shortcoming consists of, precisely, not being "wlling or capable of taking the steps needed to logically conflate conjunction and disjunction".
So addressing that shortcoming presumably amounts to "stop not being wlling or capable", or iow, "start being wlling or capable" to [take the steps needed to] "logically conflate conjunction and disjunction".
So in the mind of the author of that post, there is apparently benefit to be had by logically conflating conjunction and disjunction.
Maybe the author of that post should first learn about negation and where [and where not] to apply it before lecturing others about [or expressing oneself in extremely derogatory ways about said others' supposed lack of understanding of the differences between] "conjunction and disjunction".
Talk of pathology ...