Re: Why bother with Logical data model?

From: Kenneth Downs <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:18:57 -0400
Message-Id: <nfksq3-4sr.ln1@pluto.downsfam.net>

Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:22:20 GMT, Bob Badour
> <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>

>>JOG wrote:
>>
>>> I have just invented a new layer called the 'conceptalogical layer'.
>>> It's meaningless obviously but sounds like just the sort of thing I
>>> could build a software business on. It's  a winner I tell you
>>> </cynicism>
>>
>>It's going to have a tough time competing against my new logceptysical
>>model. Let's see who gets the book deal first! ;)


> 

>      My money is on JOG.  His term is easy to say.  Yours is awkward.

> 

>      I take that back.  *MY* model is better.  I call it

> "Conilogisal". In accordance with the first syllable, I am prepared
> to accept bribes in order to leave the market to the two of you.
> Please be generous.

I'm going to leave everyone in the dust with the new 'emotional' layer I'm adding to my database designs. You need emotional intelligence to make it work.

-- 
Kenneth Downs
Secure Data Software, Inc.
(Ken)nneth@(Sec)ure(Dat)a(.com)

Received on Thu Aug 10 2006 - 16:18:57 CDT