Craig,

>It doesn't matter if the record is deleted or not. Again, from Date (italics his):

>"...it is sufficient to say that the term "tupple" corresponds approximately to the notion of a flat record instance."

>Can you show me where Codd or Date explicitly stated that a record is a non-deleted tupple?

I didn't say this.. I said, that a non-deleted is the equivalent of a tuple. Since a deleted tuple is a non existing tuple, a deleted record should be a non existing record.

Further: note the word: approximately
Deleted records are an exclusive property of xBase languages. Neither Codd nor Date did speak about xBase languages. Outside the xBase world: If you delete a record, it is gone for good !!


You can't refute the fact that if you reuse a primary key you would only have problems in the VFP (xBase) database (if you don't use filtered PKs), not in any other. Think about this... what does this mean ???

The RM does implicetely describes that you can reuse a PK (So please don't come with the story that you should generated PKs, this is another topic). Why should we not be able to do this in VFP ???

Walter,