Re: Navigation question
Date: 25 Feb 2007 14:58:54 -0800
Message-ID: <1172444333.974143.227280_at_q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 23, 10:10 am, "Walt" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message
><snip> My questions are regarding
> > layer 7, where "logical navigation" of a database might take place.
> > Does that work for you? --dawn
>
> what do you mean by "OSI layers?" Are you talking about layers of
> protocols?
First, I'll grant that the OSI layers are not in my area of expertise, so I might very well have this wrong. I am talking specifically of the 7 layers (of protocols) identified as the "OSI layers." Given these 7 layers, I am not then talking about taking any one of these layers and further subdividiing it by protocol, but simply referring to it so that it is clear (that obviously did not work) that I'm talking about the Application Layer.
> If so, it seems to me that application to
> database theory is limited to the areas where data is exchanged in some sort
> of formal protocol.
Surely not. Database theory is highly relevant to conceptual modeling, outside of this list of 7 layers, as well as to the interface between developer and DBMS, for example. While there are surely some here who have an interest in data in some machine-readable format that might not be all that useful for human eyes or application programmers, I'm interested in Layer 7, the Application Layer. Again, I am not bringing this in so that we can discuss protocols within that layer, simply so that it is clear I'm not talking about "physical navigation."
> That sounds to me like the interface between the client
> (application software) and the server (DBMS software). If that layer uses
> SQL to express queries and updates,
Some software within the application layer uses SQL, but it is not
essential that one does, depending on the DBMS toolset.
> and some sort of data representation to
> pass result tables, then I would suggest that those who have said that
> "navigation is impossible at this layer" are correct.
I will grant that when sitting in SQL-land, we can "go" nowhere. That is why my question is about navigating databases, not about SQL or even the RM, which we can agree are separate from any form of "navigation" that might be considered an anti-pattern. Any navigation in SQL-land is physical or possibly user-navigation (conceptual), but not "logical navigation." I think mAsterdam had comments on that term that I have not yet replied to, so I'll note here that by "logical navigation" I mean that we navigate through data via appliation code and metadata, rather than by way of any physical pointers, for example.
> Whether applications should or should not navigate within their own data
> space is really not a question for database theory, is it?