dirty data (was: The naive test for equality)
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 01:50:15 +0200
Message-ID: <42fbe3fc$0$11064$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> mAsterdam wrote:
>>Gene Wirchenko wrote: >>>mAsterdam wrote: >>>>Gene Wirchenko wrote: >>>>>dawn wrote: >>[snip agreement] >>>>>>There are always differences of opinion about what constitutes a >>>>>>student on a campus. Finance people often use the term as if the >>>>>>student were the same as a corporate customer. Student = Customer. If >>>>>>someone has received some approval to audit a course for zero dollars, >>>>>>the instructor might consider them a student. That is just an example, >>>>>>but the point is that entity names are also just words and are >>>>>>interpreted by humans, each of whom brings a different context to the >>>>>>meaning of the word. >>>>> >>>>> Such a student is a student by the normal use of the term. >>>>>I think this factor is what causes a lot of the trouble. >>>> >>>>Could you elaborate some on this factor? >>> >>> One who studies. If I study medieval history, I am a student. I >>>might not be enrolled anywhere. I could even be a leading authority >>>in the field. >> >>I see what you mean, but I am not sure you got my question right. >>I meant: what is this factor which is causing a lot of trouble? >>In more modern words: what is the anatomy of this anti-pattern? >>We might learn to more easily recognize it.> already has a meaning. What distinguishes the special meaning from
>
> I think that the trouble comes from overloading terms. "student"
> the more literal meaning? If I do not know that a special meaning is
> in use in a specific context, I can make a lot of mistakes.
> I coin terms for our in-house client billing system. Two
> examples are "Work Function Code" and "Work Classification Code".
> These terms have precise meanings. It is possible for someone to
> misinterpret these, but I think that they are sufficiently unusual
> usage that most would ask what they mean instead of assuming as with
> "student".
Arrrgh - feast of recognition. Not. :-|
I'm used to similar systems. Some departments take these
distinctions very serious, other only pay lip-service.
Once in a while new managers want to know what's going
on and suddenly all kinds of conclusions hit the surface,
drawn from the highly polluted data.
> One area of confusion we have is because of overloading. We use
> "client" to mean someone who buys from us (mainly services, for
> example order fulfillment) and "customer" to refer to someone who buys
> from one of our clients. Some of our employees do not make the proper
> (for us) distinction.
You know what CICS stands for? Received on Fri Aug 12 2005 - 01:50:15 CEST