Re: Multi Valued Interface Models?
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 15:44:47 +0200
Message-ID: <dssmsg$7i2$1_at_nntp.aioe.org>
"dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1139922215.103422.104090_at_g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> x wrote:
> > > > > I think this is something like what mountain man is suggesting by
> > using
> > > > > stored procedures. You still cannot model the UI with the RM,
> > however.
> > > >
> > > > Why ?
> >
> > > See if you can step into a place where the following sentence makes
> > > sense: A View in MVC is backed by a Model which could be illustrated
by
> > > one or more UML class diagrams, and this View also has a model as
> > > illustrated by a single UML class diagram.
> >
> > I give up. You are equating the UML used for a class diagram for an MVC
View
> > with the model in "a relational model (view) of data.
>
> Don't give up yet. I'm working on writing it differently. I think
> that introducing Model, as in MVC, is causing problems, but suspect it
> is more that you are not seeing models, particularly logical data
> models, everywhere that I am seeing them.
How is it called in English seeing things where others don't ?
> > All the data in a MVC is in the Model part of it.
> No, it isn't. It has to cross from the Model part into that interface
> between the software and the user called the View. That View has a
> logical model of the data associated with it.
That logical model is encoded in the Model part.
> > The View part is just painting (output) .
> It is all just representation (input and output for some interface).
> If you separate "data model" from "storage" what is it? It is
> representation of a structure in an interface.
The output is SCREEN[x][y]-->R*G*B. Received on Tue Feb 14 2006 - 14:44:47 CET