Re: Relational vs network vs hierarchic databases

"Laconic2" <laconic2_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:4bGdnZ167pKcgQPcRVn-tA_at_comcast.com...
>
> "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.comREMOVE> wrote in message
> news:cnib1t$l0l$1_at_news.netins.net...
>
> > Agreed. I'm interested in the interface between the machine and the
> person
> > being useful and easy to use for the person. The machine itself can
think
> > like a machine, and the person can adapt to think more like a machine,
but
> > to minimize errors we can present a user interface that is as intuitive
> for
> > the human as feasible. So, if relations are something the computer
likes
> > for implementing an organization chart, that's fine, but does the person
> > interacting with the computer (the IT professional modeling the data)
need
> > to think like the computer?
>
> I disagree with your premise, that an IT professional has to think like a
> computer in order to make use of the Relational Data Model. I have too
much
> personal experience to the contrary to accept that as a general
observation.
>

I agree -- that was not what I intended as the point. It was in this instance -- where a person is thinking of an organizational hierarchy -- where I indicated that I don't care how the computer is handling the implementation of the org chart -- the person doesn't HAVE TO think like the computer. In theory, the person could specify a hierarchy as a hierarchy and use it as a hierarchy, but the underlying structures could be relations. Today we do that for the end-user, but not for the developer.

Did that make sense? --dawn Received on Fri Nov 19 2004 - 19:34:14 CET