Re: theory and practice: ying and yang

mountain man wrote:
> "Alfredo Novoa" <alfredo_novoa_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:sfj89150l0t58h9vsi359ur958cj348jtl_at_4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 25 May 2005 08:19:10 GMT, "mountain man"
> > <hobbit_at_southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote:
> >
> >>IMO theory and practice are two sides of the one coin,
> >>two views into the one reality.
> >
> > Of course, but this is rather contradictorial with many of your
> > previous posts.
>
>
> Really? Is it not possible that a person can consider
> multiple points of view, or must one consider just one
> POV?
>
>
>
> > Where do you want to go with this?
>
> Consider that:
>
> 1) Current (RM) theory has not substantially changed in 30 years

Special Theory of Relativity, about 100. still managed to incinerate 200,000 Japanese in about 10 minutes, total.

Pythagoran, about 2500. still useful.

>
> 2) The practice-environment of DBMS theory has substantially
> changed in this time, in fact one might be entitled to claim it
> has changed by a quantum leap --- in the use of RDBMS
> software (ie: built in accordance to the principles of the RM).

leap over a precipice, maybe. the XML weanies are leading that charge with a method which is yet older AND has the virtue of providing less functionality. go figure. same for the Pick-ininies.
>
> 3) Date openly admits that current (RM) theory is not understood
> by database professionals.

the same cannot, in general, be said of those who hold a certificate as Professional Engineer in any of our United States: for that you have to demonstrate that you actually know your s**t.
>
> You tell me what the implications are.

coders hate to be "constrained" by data which is smarter than they are.

btdb
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Pete Brown
> Falls Creek
> Oz
> www.mountainman.com.au
Received on Fri May 27 2005 - 04:57:09 CEST