Talk:Third normal form/Archive 1
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Nabav in topic Definition needs to be improved
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Third normal form. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I totally agree with you. The examples shown are quite ambiguguos. I had to read two to three times and still I was not able to figure out the difference.
Third Normal Form vs Second Normal Form
The example given for 3NF is identical to the one given for 2NF. If the reader reads and understands the article on 2NF, he/she is not given anything new to help in understanding 3NF especially as it relates to 2NF.
Definition needs to be improved
The defn should categorically state that no non-prime elements should be dependent on any other non-primes. Current definition is vague. Terms like "mutually independent" "transitively.." don't seem to add any value here and the same thing can be put forth in lucid and simpler english. -Weedrat 18:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Have done this now. --Nabav 20:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)