Re: By The Dawn's Normal Light
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:08:35 -0400
Message-ID: <tfGdnWVSUMKd6efcRVn-jg_at_comcast.com>
"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.comREMOVE> wrote in message
news:cldp7n$g9m$1_at_news.netins.net...
> relation. We should pick a new word.
Agreed.
> That is the search I have been on and I have gathered a lot of material,
but
> have no p --> q in logic, only in experience. I also cannot claim that
the
> gains in productivity are due exclusively to the data model. That does
seem
> to me to be one significant component, however, which is why I
investigated
> why the entire profession seems to think that we ought not have embedded
> lists in our logical data models.
I honestly think that you will find that the data model was a minor factor.
> Others attribute the productivity boost to an integrated environment, to
the
> ease in getting good performance from the database, to the lack of strong
> typing, to the DataBASIC and multivalue query languages, and to the fact
> that it isn't a DBMS (at least by my def) and doesn't tie the hands of the
> developer in the ways a DBMS with strong typing would. These are
considered
> bad things by those with a DBMS mindset, but they seem to translate into
> higher productivity, easier maintainability, and do not seem to translate
> into a loss in quality in most shops.
There is one thing that comes through clear as a bell, in the descriptions you have given previously. And it isn't in the above list. It's the fact that the Pick people in your favorable experiences started with a thorough understanding of the subject matter, and of the real needs of the people that would end up being users.
They then learned enough IT to implement what their understanding told them was the "right thing".
By contrast, most "IT professionals" spend years learning implementation, a few months learning modeling and design, and a few weeks learning the subject matter. As a consequence, their analysis is terribly superficial, their design is somewhat stronger, and their implementation is truly impressive. But that's like the foolish man who built his house on a foundation of sand, in the parable. It doesn't matter how well built the house is, if the foundation is weak.
The foundation of a successful application is the subject matter.
I can't prove it to you, (of course!), but I deeply believe that, at the end of the day, that's the conclusion you'll come to. Received on Sat Oct 23 2004 - 17:08:35 CEST