Object identity and naming — evaluate the claim.\n\n"You may specify an object identifier (OID) with only one unique tag name."

Introduction / Context:
Object databases distinguish between object identity (OID) and attribute values. OIDs are internal, system-assigned identifiers that uniquely identify an object regardless of its attribute values. The statement introduces an ambiguous idea of a “unique tag name,” which does not align with standard OID semantics.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• OID is a unique, opaque identifier managed by the database.
• User-defined names or labels may exist, but they are separate attributes or metadata.
• Keys/unique constraints on attributes are different from OIDs.

Concept / Approach:
In object data models, you do not typically “specify an OID with a tag.” The system assigns OIDs, and applications reference objects via these identifiers or via navigational paths. If a human-readable unique name is required, it is modeled as a unique attribute (a key), not as the OID itself.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Review systems using OIDs: object DBs, ORMs with identity maps. Naming conventions are optional attributes; identity remains independent and system-defined.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Claiming it is valid confuses OID with a user-defined key.
• Relational/XML/programming-binding variants shift the context away from OID fundamentals.

Common Pitfalls:
Treating human-readable names as identity; changing a “name” and expecting identity to change; mixing up surrogate keys (like integer IDs) with user-facing unique codes.

Final Answer:
Invalid (OIDs are system-assigned; “tag name” is not the constraint)