Answer Happy

Given a relation with scheme {ID, Name, Address, Postcode,
CardType, CardNumber}, the candidate key {ID}, and the following
functional dependencies:
• {ID} => {Name, Address, Postcode, CardType, CardNumber}
• {Address} => {Postcode}
• {CardNumber} => {CardType}
(i) Explain why this relation is in second normal form, but not
in third normal form?
(ii) Show how this relation can be converted to third normal
form? You should show what functional dependencies are being
removed, explain why they need to be removed, and give the
relation(s) that result.
(iii) Give an example of a relation that is in third normal
form, but that is not in Boyce-Codd normal form, and explain why it
is in third, but not Boyce-Codd, normal form?
Note: '=>' is used as FDs sign. Thanks for your
help.