Re: THe OverRelational Manifesto (ORM)
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 07:37:22 GMT
Message-ID: <SEoZf.1221$vy1.153_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au>
"paul c" <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in message
news:bzhZf.3504$_u1.1270_at_pd7tw2no...
> mountain man wrote:
>> ...
>> The problem is that everyone accepts as "good enough" a theory of data
>> all by its little lonesome self, whereas what is actually required in the
>> fullness
>> of time is a theory of data and of data processing.
>> ...
>
> Would like to know where Date has ever said that, let alone "everyone"
> else.
The RM is a theory of data objects.
It fails to address program objects.
(eg: sql stored procedures).
And as far as the assertion that a theory of data objects is different from a theory of data processing objects, I'd be inclided to think that Date has never seen it this way because all he is interested in is the data objects.
OTOH it is my contention that what will be required in the longer term will be not just be a theory of data objects, and another theory of program objects, but an integrated theory of both data and program objects, together known as data processing objects.
-- Pete Brown www.mountainman.com.au/namaste_2006.htmlReceived on Fri Apr 07 2006 - 09:37:22 CEST