Re: Navigation question
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:12:04 GMT
Message-ID: <UWIEh.1694$PV3.23608_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Walt wrote:
> "dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1172505529.681070.131640_at_q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On Feb 26, 8:28 am, "Walt" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>news: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."
>>>
>>>Could you list the layers, and give a link to a web page that describes
>>>them?
>>
>>I just did a google and I'm not sure whether you had trouble finding a
>>link or if this is a test to see which link I would choose. We can
>>start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model
>
>
> I know how to google. I wanted to see what page you were reading from, so
> that we could read from the same page.
>
> The page you pointed me to is a good starting place. So you are talking
> about protocols.
>
>
>
>>If I had been quizzed, I would have gotten the top, the bottom, and a >>few others by name, but I have never studied nor memorized these >>layers. I only referred to them in order to get the focus of the >>question on the application layer. >> >> >>>>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.
>
> I don't understand the above. "Surely not" what? Do you mean "Surely not
> limited to areas where data is exchanged in some sort of formal protocol"?
> If that's the case, why did you refer to "the OSI Layers"?
>
>
> 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."
>
>
> If you are not talking about protocols, then why are the OSI layers
> relevant to your discussion?
>
> I'm terribly confused by what you have written.
>
>
>>strictly DBMS navigation). BTW, I didn't mention Pascal. I included >>JOG as the third.
>
> Noted.
>
>
>>>Any navigation a programmer >>>does entirely within the application is not relevant to the comments
>
> Cdd,
>
>>>Date, and Pascal have made regarding database data. >> >>Really? I thought they were opposed to "database navigation" in >>general, whether the application is navigating its way through the >>data or the DBMS is, or some combination. Hmmm. Perhaps one >>difficulty with the terms is that I consider DBMS specifications >>related to any application suite to be "part of" that application >>suite.
Walt, keep in mind -- at the current state of medicine -- ignorance may be chronic while curable but stupidity is terminal. Received on Mon Feb 26 2007 - 23:12:04 CET