Re: 3vl 2vl and NULL
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:09:44 +0100
Message-ID: <43c2a657$0$11079$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>> ...
>>
>> I'm presuming no such thing. I'm talking about the model of the data
>> needed for the screen. To answer David's question too, if you were to
>> prepare a diagram of your choice, perhaps UML these days, of the
>> logical data model that a software application needs for interfacing
>> with the database and the logical model it needs for the UI, choosing
>> the same entities and attributes to model, your UML diagrams would be
>> different. Given there is an industry arising from this along with the
>> OO-RM impedence mismatch, I think this is rather well established.
>>
>> We take data in from a screen as strings, change them to objects based
>> on specifications in code or parameter data, and then to relations
>> based on specifications in code or parameter data, with each process
>> validating everything along the way. The RDBMS takes those relations,
>> validates with constraint logic likely written in a different language
>> than the other validations, and turns the data into strings to be
>> stored.
>>
>> That doesn't seem efficient in either machine or people time for both
>> development and maintenance activities. Or am I missing something?
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:09:44 +0100
Message-ID: <43c2a657$0$11079$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
paul c wrote:
> dawn wrote: >
>> ...
>>
>> I'm presuming no such thing. I'm talking about the model of the data
>> needed for the screen. To answer David's question too, if you were to
>> prepare a diagram of your choice, perhaps UML these days, of the
>> logical data model that a software application needs for interfacing
>> with the database and the logical model it needs for the UI, choosing
>> the same entities and attributes to model, your UML diagrams would be
>> different. Given there is an industry arising from this along with the
>> OO-RM impedence mismatch, I think this is rather well established.
>>
>> We take data in from a screen as strings, change them to objects based
>> on specifications in code or parameter data, and then to relations
>> based on specifications in code or parameter data, with each process
>> validating everything along the way. The RDBMS takes those relations,
>> validates with constraint logic likely written in a different language
>> than the other validations, and turns the data into strings to be
>> stored.
>>
>> That doesn't seem efficient in either machine or people time for both
>> development and maintenance activities. Or am I missing something?
> > > > Dawn, I think you are on the right track, but I think you must throw out > some of the conventional lingo/arguments before it goes anywhere. F... > (you know what i mean) the 'modelling', etc. The data has already been > modelled. Just my 2 cents.
The screen-data? How?
BTW why is this still in a NULL thread? Received on Mon Jan 09 2006 - 19:09:44 CET