Re: What does this NULL mean?

"dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1135183860.042364.74470_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> mountain man wrote:
> > "David Cressey" <dcressey_at_verizon.net> wrote in message
> <snip>
> > The time will eventually arrive when
> > the model of the code and the model of the data will be taken
> > under one theoretical umbrella.

Er, this is mountain man's wording, not mine. Not that I take issue with it.

>
> Some strands within the s/w development profession have addressed this
> better than others over the years.
>
> I'm also in the process-&-data-are-two-sides-of-the-same-coin camp. If
> you zoom out, you see that we are working with input, processing,
> storage, and output. Data models are obviously required for each of
> these areas and processing is the big picture. You can see the
> processing clearly with input, processing, and output, but it is also
> implied with storage -- it is intended for use so there is an
> interface for input so there can be processing and output. Decisions
> related to data affect process and vice versa -- they are necessarily
> interwoven into a whole.
>

When I zoom out a ways, where I end up is the ER model. The ER model is still data centric, but is less biased towards a given implementation than the RDM is. The ER model is more likely tobe brought under a single theoretical umbrella with some process model of data (or some data model of process) than the RDM.

Given the simplicity with which one can transform between the ER model and the RDM, I don't regard this as a major feature of the hurdle to be overcome.

> Some db theorists, or worse yet, practitioners, seem to want to
> consider stores without doors or customers. Some people are interested
> in cars without drivers too so they can look at them and admire their
> design. So I can see how this happens, but it is not the type of
> practical approach one needs in the business world.
>

Not guilty. I'm concerned with cars with lots of drivers, and stores with lots of customers.
Drivers and customers who don't necessarily talk to each other, although they both collaborate and compete for resources. Received on Thu Dec 22 2005 - 00:04:29 CET