>It seems that we have very different points of view here. May because you don't understand the relational model.
Wlater,
Your suggestion is not relational at all. It is simply concealing a record oriented ISAM approach to data with a wrapper that makes it look relational.
To what authorities do you attribute the statement, "SQL is a bad implementation of the relational model"?
xBase is NOT relational.
It fails most of Codd's original 13 rules.
It is record oriented, the relational model is rooted in mathematical set theory.
It deals with record pointers, the relational model states that the only way to identify an instance of an entity is through the primary key.
It requires that the programmer know the physical storage structure to deal with the data, relational model says the developer need know only the logic structure and need know nothing about the physical structure.
xBase has many commands in it that allow access to the data by bypassing the relational logical structure, relational theory says the only way to access the data is through its relational structure.
That's just the beginning of the list that could be built. Arguing that xBase is more relational than SQL is pure hogwash. Relational databases were invented by E. F. Codd and SQL was invented by E. F. Codd for the purpose of working with and manipulating relational database in a purely relational fashion.
