Re: Table/Attribute Modeling

Marshall wrote:
> I was interviewing a guy today, and he had obviously
> been formally schooled in ERM. Every time I run in to
> that I feel vaguely left out. I don't have a methodology
> with a cool name that I use. How am I supposed to
> impress the babes and wow my boss without an
> important name for what I do? Waaah!
>
> Driving home, it hit me: I *do* have a methodology
> that I use for schema design; it just doesn't have
> a cool name. What I need is a cool name! So I
> tried to think of a name for the methodology I use
> for schema design; one that was important sounding,
> so it would impress people, and yet also descriptive
> of what it is I actually do. I then it came to me:
>
> "Table/Attribute Modeling."
>
> I do T/AM. What crappy methodology do you use?
> Oh, that's so 1990s. I pity you.
> ...

A couple of posts here lately made me think of the irrelevant "methodologies" of the 70's and 80's. A most discredited word, I think, at least for people who spend their time applying theory that the methodologies claim to manage, while the latter make no attempt to understand the theory.

p Received on Fri Mar 09 2007 - 21:31:49 CST