Koen Verbeeck (5/19/2014)
Grant Fritchey (5/19/2014)
I usually just refer to row and column. They may not be 100% ISO approved terms, but, everyone knows what you're referring to for the most part. And if we're explaining things, the most important goal of the explanation is clarity. So we could use tuple and element to explain stuff, but then we have to go back and explain tuple and element and, at least to my mind, there's no additional clarity added by using tuple and element. Frankly, that would be an indication of a wish to be pedantic rather than a wish to help people out.How do you refer to the intersection of a row and a column?
If we're talking about a specific design, I just say something like "That's in the City column" and let people infer that I'm also referring to a row and an intersection of the two. If we're talking theory, I'll probably say "The value of that column in that row" and not refer to the intersection as any particular object name. That's because, unlike column & row, cell isn't commonly used by people.
All this is assuming we're talking teaching DBAs, developers, report writers, management and business people. Those are my audience. If, on the other hand, I was teaching database theory to mathematicians, different audience, different approach. But then, you wouldn't want me teaching database theory to those people.
But, remember, I get winged by all you guys because I don't go in for precise terminology use in all cases.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning