Re: Specifying all biz rules in relational data
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 08:10:27 +0200
Message-ID: <41492e59$0$36861$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>>Fredrik Bertilsson wrote:
>>>>My own first principle is this: Code is a non-portable depreciating
>>>>asset, while data is a portable appreciating asset.
>>>
>>>It is possible to make code portable (between opertating systems).
>>>
>>>>In other words, like diamonds, data is forever, while code is not.
>>>
>>>I almost agree. In history data has changed from flat files to
>>>hiarchical databases to relational databases. It is not for ever, but
>>>almost. But of course programming languages changes much more often
>>>than database paradigms.
>>
>>It seems to me that the OP looks at "data" as meaningful by
>>definition. Looking at it that way, no data change occurred when
>>moving the bits and bytes representing the data from "flat files to
>>hiarchical databases to relational databases.", none at all.
>>I have been involved in the developement of
>>several largish applications, including a complete
>>CRUD-GUI (+ some CRUD scripting system) mostly for
>>testing purposes. Maybe 10% of the programming
>>budget went into that. When you have the CRUD-stuff
>>you aren't anywhere near a serious application -
>>in my experience.
>
> Please elaborate on the other 90%.
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 08:10:27 +0200
Message-ID: <41492e59$0$36861$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
> mAsterdam wrote:
>>Fredrik Bertilsson wrote:
>>>>My own first principle is this: Code is a non-portable depreciating
>>>>asset, while data is a portable appreciating asset.
>>>
>>>It is possible to make code portable (between opertating systems).
>>>
>>>>In other words, like diamonds, data is forever, while code is not.
>>>
>>>I almost agree. In history data has changed from flat files to
>>>hiarchical databases to relational databases. It is not for ever, but
>>>almost. But of course programming languages changes much more often
>>>than database paradigms.
>>
>>It seems to me that the OP looks at "data" as meaningful by
>>definition. Looking at it that way, no data change occurred when
>>moving the bits and bytes representing the data from "flat files to
>>hiarchical databases to relational databases.", none at all.
> > Assuming the data is correct :) >
>>I have been involved in the developement of
>>several largish applications, including a complete
>>CRUD-GUI (+ some CRUD scripting system) mostly for
>>testing purposes. Maybe 10% of the programming
>>budget went into that. When you have the CRUD-stuff
>>you aren't anywhere near a serious application -
>>in my experience.
>
> Please elaborate on the other 90%.
Most interactions are more complicated than this game. The users do *not* think in terms of what is stored in the database - they might not even know that there is one. Received on Thu Sep 16 2004 - 08:10:27 CEST