Re: IDIOT! Your Data Model Can't Possibly Work!
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 17:13:04 GMT
Message-ID: <AWu0g.60859$VV4.1129151_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
>
>
>
> This is so funny! Bob, for half a decade you have been telling me that
> my data model couldn't possibly work, that I didn't have this or that
> operator, or this or that predicate, didn't attend this or that
> college
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 17:13:04 GMT
Message-ID: <AWu0g.60859$VV4.1129151_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Neo wrote:
>>>>Jay Dee: The most resilient designs are those which accurately represent data, not relationships. In that vein, I've found Halpern's ORM approach to be helpful -- although his goal of discovering objects is, I feel, slightly off the mark.
>
>>>Neo: Would you (or someone) be willing to demonstrate this resiliency starting with ... simple example and then extending a bit further?
>
>>Bob Badour: Neo, you are so full of shit your eyes must be brown. You are an ignorant who doesn't have a clue what he is talking about. NIAM, nijssen and halpin. They set the reference point for conceptual modelling about 20 years ago. Since that time, I have seen nothing I would consider a groundshaking improvement; although, Jan or Vadim might have a better idea if something significantly changed the state of the art in recent years.
>
>
> This is so funny! Bob, for half a decade you have been telling me that
> my data model couldn't possibly work, that I didn't have this or that
> operator, or this or that predicate, didn't attend this or that
> college
Bullshit. I have been telling you that you are ignorant and stupid. You are in fact too stupid to understand any aspect of the topic you claim to have improved. Received on Sun Apr 16 2006 - 19:13:04 CEST