>Please educate me on this topic. I'm confused. Specifically what does Visual FoxPro have (or not have) that precludes it from being a relational database management system (RDBMS) in your opinion?
>
>I did a little bit of Googling and came up with a few definitions all of which seem to fit Visual FoxPro:
>
>http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid13_gci212885,00.html
>
>Here's another one that seems to fit:
>
>http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/R/RDBMS.html
>http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/D/database_management_system_DBMS.html
>
>Oh, here's another one that fits:
>
>http://www.sf-systems.com/technology/tech080102.shtml
>
>and this one too:
>
>http://coral.lili.uni-bielefeld.de/EAGLES/WP5/termdeliv97/node38.html

I was thinking about the fact that VFP tables are not contained in a monolithic file (or two) that guarantees they are synchronized, but I see that is not a requirement to be considered relational, and am willing to concede the point.

What I was trying to argue is that even if VFP were not considered relational, that is no reason for the professor to think less of it.

Alex