Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!problem!compus!lethe!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!grad2.cis.upenn.edu!aaron
From: aaron@grad2.cis.upenn.edu (Aaron Watters)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: ER versus dependency normalization methods.
Message-ID: <34324@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 7 Dec 90 18:43:07 GMT
References: <33445@netnews.upenn.edu> <47315@sequent.UUCP> <358@6sigma.UUCP>
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: aaron@grad1.cis.upenn.edu (Aaron Watters)
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 11

In article <358@6sigma.UUCP> zuker@6sigma.UUCP (Hunter Zuker) writes:
>From what I've seen of ER diagrams there is not enough information to go
>to third normal form.  You easily get 1st normal form and might scramble
>to 2nd.  But an automized normalization procedure doesn't get enough
>information from ER diagrams to go to third normal form.

Okay: example?  Also, how do you get the information (dependancies)
from the user so you can say whether you are at 3rd normal form
or not.  I find it hard to imagine a user casually mentioning
`by the way FLIGHTSPEED conditionally-multidetermines WINGSTRENGHT
given WEIGHT and WINGSPAN.'		-aaron.