Marshall Spight wrote:
> "Kenneth Downs" <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net> wrote in message
> news:9lv9lc.vdt.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net...
>>
>> No reverse-engineering. There is a one-way street that goes:
>>
>> Human being or design tool -> text file spec -> tool -> database
>>
>> It actually took me years to completely work out the idea that the system
>> of record must exist both in definition and in reality outside of the
>> system
>> it governs. If you are building a database you can store a reference
>> copy of the spec inside of it, but the persistent store for the spec must
>> be
>> outside of the database. It took so long because I tried it different
>> ways and then of course had to make a living with the results of
>> different decisions before I could try it a different way.
>
> This is an intriguing statement, and I would like to ask you to expand
> on it. I expect I am some years earlier in the process than you are;
> I have seen evidence for this, but I'm still thinking in terms of having
> the catalog in the database. (But I suppose this is the "reference copy"
> you mention.)
>
>
> Marshall
I will respond in Laconic's thread on the Diff engine, providing the outline
of my process. The absolute simplest answer is that if the database is
somehow corrupted, I've lost my system of record.
- The vendor has their catalog, and they are bound by the rules that it be
synchronized with the database.
- But I am not the DBMS vendor, I am a user, so my catalog can be built
with a different rationale, for different reason. I certainly do not
*Want* it to become unsynchronized, but tragically I cannot prevent it.
--
Kenneth Downs
Use first initial plus last name at last name plus literal "fam.net" to
email me
Received on Sat Oct 23 2004 - 20:19:24 CDT
