Re: Navigation question
Date: 16 Feb 2007 07:06:54 -0800
Message-ID: <1171638414.684248.251360_at_v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 16, 1:53 pm, "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I figured it out -- I'm designing for the USER and when designing at
> the logical level, I'm also designing workflow. After pulling up
> information about a company, for example, the user goes to one of the
> orders listed. From there, they might go to a product that is part of
> a line item on the order. This is similar to users who go to a web
> site and from there navigate to other web sites. Users navigate.
> Their workflow includes a navigation path. So, at the conceptual
> level we can navigate, users navigate, and at the physical level we
> navigate.
Yes, we can navigate around a user interface - the conceptual level.
Yes, c++ code can navigate around its internal data structures - the
physical level.
No, we should not be navigating around propositions - the logical
level. That we be a "salmon smack" by all accounts.
> But there is one thread of theory within software
> development that keeps pushing against navigation, as if it were a bad
> thing.
No! You are generalizing. Database Theorists only say navigation is a bad thing at the logical level. However, I have a feeling that you might have reached a recognition point here, and if so I think that's great. Received on Fri Feb 16 2007 - 16:06:54 CET