Re: pro- foreign key propaganda?

From: Bob Badour <>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 13:40:27 -0300
Message-ID: <4836f382$0$4031$>

David Cressey wrote:

> "paul c" <toledobysea_at_ac.ooyah> wrote in message
> news:5RzZj.289321$pM4.276671_at_pd7urf1no...

>>David Cressey wrote:
>>>This may be true.  But with regard to the value of data in databases, and
>>>the return on the effort involved in building, maintaining, and accessing

>>>them,  you can't separate meaning from purpose.  And you can't separate
>>>purpose from outcome.  Call me a mystic, if you must.
>>>If poetry includes Homer's Iliad,  there is quite a bit of mechanics
>>>involved in the making of it.
>>I don't argue with that and from what you've said I wouldn't call you a
>>mystic.  I was scoffing at the penchant for looking for meaning in a
>>data design where none was intended.  If one doesn't know the intended
>>interpretation, it is a mug's game to guess at it, the design is only
>>capable of restricting some of the possible intentions.
>>(I'd say the mechanics of poetry aren't part of what you call the rdm.)

> Agreed. I just don't want poetry to be relegated to the domain of mystics,
> and databases to be relegated to the domain of mechanics. Mechanics are
> important to doing things right, no matter what you're doing. Doing things
> right is kind of a waste, if you're not doing the right thing. And figuring
> out what the right thing is can seem downright mystical. At least, so it
> seems to me.

I think it only seems that way before one knows what metrics to use. Once one understands what to measure, everything becomes much more mechanical. Received on Fri May 23 2008 - 18:40:27 CEST

Original text of this message