Re: General semantics

From: Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 14:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <8db2c1e7-3e21-48dd-bddd-c8babb802929_at_40g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>



Snipped.
>
> > Does ORM really worth the effort of reading ? What does it add that is
> > not already a part of RM?
>
> NIAM is at the conceptual level of discourse and is useful for analysis.
> It has particular strengths for communicating with domain experts, who
> can more readily catch analytical errors when presented as formalized
> natural language sentences with examples, and who might otherwise
> misinterpret unfamiliar graphical representations.
>
> In my experience, domain experts will never say "I don't understand your
> picture." They will interpret the picture to match their knowledge of
> the domain and happily change their interpretation in different contexts
> without ever noticing.

Point noted for future reading.

Graphical representations indeed disrupts clear thinking and makes it more difficult to remain logical and concentrated about design. As a administrator I am not involved much in applicative design, I am not familiar with NIAM. I tend to think that the systems themselves should take care of limiting subjectiveness to its minimum by the way they allow the design process to unfold. I think of Dataphora and how the initial versions helped a lot into such direction. At the moment, basic text editors seem the only sound tools to do clean design. Received on Fri May 21 2010 - 16:51:42 CDT

Original text of this message