Re: Objects and Relations
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 00:50:54 GMT
Message-ID: <OZLDh.1122194$5R2.497518_at_pd7urf3no>
David BL wrote:
> On Feb 23, 11:24 am, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:
>
>>Lemming wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:50:55 GMT, Bob Badour >>><bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote: >>> >>>> ... >>>>Humans tend toward laziness and complacency. Something has to shock them >> >>>>from their revery before they act. >> >>>Blimey, seems like school is out again. >> >>>I'll come back in a week or so. Maybe there will be some grownups >>>here by then. >> >>Blimey yourself. Things aren't likely to change in ten years at the >>rate this group is going. The thread title, "Objects and Relations" >>ought to tell any regular reader that it is about apples and oranges aka >>minotaurs and two-legged creatures.
>
>
> Yes, like most on this NG you say that RM+RA is for recording and
> managing data, while OO is not. Unfortunately this view is
> simplistic.
>
> Consider the following
> * Images
> * Text
> * Source code
> * Scenegraphs
> * CAD drawings
> * Tri-surfaces
> * Web pages
> * Sound data
> * Video data
>
> None of these areas appear to be handled particularly well with RM
> +RA. Yet they all represent problem domains where data needs to be
> recorded, persisted and managed.
> ...
This has come up so many times over the years but it still amazes me as to why people are so attracted to such a vague mystical stance. You might as well say the King James Bible is a valid topic for this group.
When you want to talk about this stuff, I think you must qualify what you say because most novices confuse appearance with intent. Take an image - what is it you would like to state about it?
To echo one of the deeper thinkers than I, I reject completely the misconception that today's computers or the theory they use can understand images in the same way that humans do, no matter what db or programming technique they might use.
Whereas if you want to say which x-y coordinates of which areas in the image or photograph are agreed to be taken to stand for the image of the person named Codd, then RM is okay. Other interpreations such as border photo imagery recognition aren't exactly in the scope of this group.
p Received on Sat Feb 24 2007 - 01:50:54 CET