title: Database normalisation (1NF to 3NF)
body: <p>I'm currently doing some coursework where I have been given a suggested table where I have to identify which normal form rules it would break. Which I think I have done, but I have been getting confused when to apply certain rules. So I would be grateful if someone could check it and explain to me why things are wrong if there is any. </p>
  
  <p>Example: </p>
  
  <p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/FAcLu.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/FAcLu.png" alt="UNF"></a></p>
  
  <p>This would break 1NF as there is duplicate data as each photographer may attend multiple matches (Matches ID) hence to solve this and bring to 1NF I do this:</p>
  
  <p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/jzg7P.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/jzg7P.png" alt="1NF and 2NF"></a></p>
  
  <p>As there is no composite key it is already in 2NF for both tables, however there are transitive dependencies between company and company number. Therefore do this to bring to 3NF:</p>
  
  <p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/LAsFo.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/LAsFo.png" alt="3nf"></a></p>
  
  <p>Is Mobile No and Photo Name also a transitive dependency? If someone has the same name it would mean it is not? Also I'm unsure if I would have classified the Company and Company number as duplicates when taking it to 1NF. </p>
  
  <p>Thanks.</p>
  
  <hr>
  
  <p>EDIT: note, Sorry for the confusion - PhotoID is the Photographers ID. Full column names: </p>
  
  <p><code>Photographer ID (Primary key) &lt;- Told this is the PK in the question</code></p>
  
  <pre><code>Photographer Name,
  
  Mobile Phone Number,
  
  Employing Company, &lt;-Told this is unique in the question
  
  Employing Company Phone Number,
  
  Matches Attending,
  </code></pre>