Re: The Foundation of OO (XDb)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:14:34 -0400
Message-ID: <SctP8.3$eF1.678936_at_radon.golden.net>
"Topmind" <topmind_at_technologist.com> wrote in message
news:4e705869.0206171151.6e02829b_at_posting.google.com...
> > What was wrong with the representation I gave?
> > I like it a lot better than yours
>
> 1. It was about food and not media libraries
Huh? You are obviously talking about something else. It was about representing Video as a data type in a dbms.
> 2. It will tend to wrap if it gets too long.
> Keeping schemas vertical makes wrap problems
> less likely (for usenet purposes).
What would wrap?
> > Why not assume user-defined type support? I assume it.
>
> Do you mean "media format types"? I did not define
> nor limit who can change what. That is an orthogonal
> issue IMO.
No, I mean user-defined type support such that Video is a data type.
> > Why should we force users to deal with filenames?
>
> This is the developer's perspective, not the users.
> I did not define nor limit user interfaces here.
> That is an orthogonal issue.
What developer is involved when a user queries a database from Excel?
> > Does the user even have access to that directory?
> > If they are absolute path names, how do we ensure all computers
> > have that drive mapped to the same drive letter?
>
> Those kind of things are going to be issues regardless
> of our development strategy.
Not if Video is simply a data type. No filenames, no paths, no hassles.
> How or where you put the
> actual media files/blobs is going to assume some platform
> or storage mechanism. It is okay if we assume
> an HTTP (web) interface for discussion purposes?
Not blobs, Video is a well-defined data type with well-defined operations. Why pretend it is nothing more than a stream of bits?
I suggest we assume what was already spelled out in my earlier post and nothing more.
> > Why not store a physical representation from
> > which the dbms can derive all the others?
>
> I am not sure what you mean here.
I can see that. Video has multiple possible representations. Why force anyone to choose? Why not support all the possible representations as one logical type?
>
> -T-
Received on Tue Jun 18 2002 - 00:14:34 CEST