Re: On view updating

From: Kenneth Downs <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 09:12:42 -0400
Message-ID: <asq3jc.vhm.ln@mercury.downsfam.net>

Laconic2 wrote:

>
> "mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message
> news:41553835$0$559$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
>

>> Delving into the nature of the jargonclashes:
>> they are due to thinking that we are discussing
>> the same things, when in fact we are not, or,
>> the other way around: thinking we are discussing
>> different things because we use different words
>> to denote the same thing. These problems are not
>> in how we perceive the subjectmatter, but just
>> in our different labeling of it.

>
> Your entire point is excellent, and very well stated.
>
> But I want to point out the overlap between this aspect of the jargon
> problem, and a classic problem when multiple groups try to integrate
> their
> data: it's the synonym and homonym problem. Two groups use different
> codes
> to identify what are in fact the same thing. Or two groups use the same
> code to identify what are, in fact, two distinct entities, albeit closely
> related.
>
> This happens over and over again. Reconciling these clashes is one of the
> most time consuming aspects of creating an integrated database, where
> several disjoint databases existed before.

But it happens even at the level of individuals. I come from a shop and call a table the "lines" table and you call it the "detail" table, and it takes only 20 seconds to clear it up, but only because we caught that one.

This is perhaps why adding manpower to software projects slows them down.

-- 
Kenneth Downs
Use first initial plus last name at last name plus literal "fam.net" to
email me

Received on Sat Sep 25 2004 - 08:12:42 CDT