Darren Duncan wrote: >>Also, I don't agree with the notion of a "header" of each relation. It >>has a type for each tuple item, sure, but "header" just sounds like the >>sort of thing you want in a ResultSet, not a Relation. >>Sam. >> >> >A relation's heading is essentially the definition of the relation's >structure, and is not redundant if the relation has no tuples in it, >which is valid. > >
The Relation has a type, which is a Relation of Tuples of something. The "Header" you refer to is the higher order part of the Tuple, the "something". Sam.
