Re: the relational model of data objects *and* program objects

> ...and once again in the next layer of the code, as in:
>
> 1) db layer
> 2) web service layer
> 3) browser layer

This (standard) structure of layers is not very good. It reflects the current state of technologies (not very successful). It is a kind of system or infrastructure architecture.

> This is why the One True Data Dictionary must exist outside of all of them,
> and be used to implement all of them. If the spec is both
> machine-readable and human-readable, mores the better.

Having "One True Data Dictionary" means binding the whole system to one layer - it is absolutism, i.e., precisely what should be avoided. We need a layered system of dictionaries (if we are talking about dictionaries) where one layer defines a dictionary which is used in another layer and so on. Any one dictionary is not absolute and is based on some more fundamental layers (just like its functionality, data structure, relationships and all other things). The conventional existing technologies and models do not reflect such a method of system representation and there exist several major alternatives how this approach could be developed. The main difficulty is to get rid of the temptation to think using the standard coordinate system (relational model, object-oriented programming etc., i.e., what we were taught in school and what we are frequently forced to use to be qualified as "successful" professionals).

alex
http://conceptoriented.com Received on Fri Apr 15 2005 - 11:04:45 CEST