Oracle comments on recurringDuration

This is from a note from Oracle.  My comments
below prefixed by AM>

6. recurringDuration
----------------------------

there appears to be a typo in 3.2.7.  The second sentence:
"The order-relation on timeDuration ..." should read:
"The order-relation on recurringDuration ...".
AM> Yes, that's a typo we need to fix

This also brings out a technical problem.  Since recurring
duration has two facets (duration and period) which should
enter into determining the order-relation, the specified
rule (x<y iff y - x is positive) is not adequate.  We could
say that when either duration or period is fixed, the
variable facet would be used to determine order-relation.
AM> The order relation works
AM> for datatypes whih the same values of the period and
AM> duration facets.  It is undefined for datatypes where
AM> these facets have different values.

There also seems to be a conflict between what the text of
3.2.7 (paragraph 3) says and what the explanatory box says.
The text says: "... it can be used as a datatype on its own
...",  where the box says: "It is an error for
recurringDuration to be used directly in a schema".
AM> We need to reconcile the wording in para 3 and in the box.


All the best, Ashok

Received on Tuesday, 16 May 2000 11:31:09 UTC