Re: A rant about the terminology debate

On 2012-08-24, at 19:00, Richard Cyganiak wrote:

> On 24 Aug 2012, at 12:32, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> How would you map g-box, g-snap, and g-text in formal relational DBMS terminology? Such a mapping would help many. Basically, mapping to relations, sets of tuples, and notation.
> 
> The SQL spec calls them:
> 
> g-box: "site" or "variable" (e.g., a base table is a site that can hold an instance of a table value)
> 
> g-snap: "value" (e.g., the state of a base table at any given time is a "table value")
> 
> g-text: "SQL-statement", composed of various kinds of "expressions"
> 
> Probably doesn't help too much.

No, and circling around, no actual practitioners use those terms with that meaning…

If you say SQL Site, or SQL Variable, people will have a different conflicting definition in their head, it doesn't matter what the spec says because hardly anyone* ever reads it.

- Steve

* proportionally to the size of the user-base.

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO
Garlik, a part of Experian
+44 7854 417 874  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80 1ZZ

Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 15:59:33 UTC