Re: Navigation question

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:34:55 GMT
Message-ID: <P%WCh.9002$R71.139123@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

Andy Dingley wrote:

> On 20 Feb, 17:57, "Walt" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> 

>>"Andy Dingley" <ding..._at_codesmiths.com> wrote in message
>>
>>news:1171990396.924858.28580_at_p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...> On 14 Feb, 19:47, "Marshall" <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>select * from orders where date > '2006-01-01' and status =
>>>>'fulfilled' and customerid = 1234
>>
>>>>You say what you want and you get just that. No sifting
>>>>through stuff you don't want; no navigating.
>>
>>>Why is that good though? Because it avoids navigation, or because it
>>>avoids round-tripping?
>>>IMHO it's avoiding the second thhat is the advantage here, not the
>>>first
>>
>>Neither of the above. It's good because it does not require the inquirer to
>>know about anything other than the data.

> 
> That depends on what you care about most. IMHO, it's _both_ that are
> important, however some may be locally more important than others.

Actually, Walt's point is a couple orders of magnitude more important than the other two. It's easy to teach a business analyst, for example, data he or she already understands. It's counter-productive to try to teach the same analyst data structures and algorithms.

[irrelevant anecdotes snipped] Received on Wed Feb 21 2007 - 06:34:55 CST