Re: database systems and organizational intelligence

From: Laconic2 <laconic2_at_comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 10:11:10 -0400
Message-ID: <vM-dnfgxwLmtOCndRVn-uQ_at_comcast.com>


"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:c92552$lnf$1_at_news.netins.net...
> Also,
>
> A user querying "the data" need not know whether the vocabulary they are
> using is for stored data or derived data (user-defined function, for
> example).
>
> Data are stored in functions (any relation with a candidate key can be
seen
> as a function) and code is based on data and functions.
>
> Code can be stored as data, just as any document can
>
> Data is used to specify code (such as in a declarative language)
>
> Metadata is code or specifies code and is, as the word suggests, also data
>
> Business Rules specify code as data
>
> The biggest difference I can see is that stored data (including Rules)
have
> both IT professionals and end-users as stewards of that data, while most
> other data and code have only the IT professionals as stewards.
>
> Otherwise, code and data seem to be two sides of the same coin.

Having said that code and data have some things in common, I think it's important to note how startling the differences are:

All of the best descritpions of the parsing of code that I have seen break code down into a tree structure. All of the best descriptions I have seen of the structure of data break data down (or assemble it) into a relational structure. I know you differ with me on this last point. That's an ongoing difference between you and me.

In order to work meaningfully with data from a relational perspective, it's first necessary to put it into "normal form" (generally called "1NF"). Some people in this forum are adamant that unnormalized data is "excommunicate and anathema". That's too doctrinaire for me. But I'm far from accepting your challenge that the RDM is doing more harm than good to IT.

No one has, AFAIK, done a good job of reducing code to a "normal form". The closest thing, afaik, is the metadata that describes triggers and constraints.

I also have some comments on "stewardship", but that's another story. Received on Wed May 26 2004 - 16:11:10 CEST

Original text of this message