Re: Navigation question

On Mar 1, 8:43 am, "Walt" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1172707120.938940.196760_at_t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Feb 28, 4:00 pm, "Walt" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> > > "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > <quote>
> > > I am still not satisfied that I understand just what navigation is bad
> > > and why "logical navigation" of the types I have presented is clumped
> > > in with phyiscal navigation and considered an anti-pattern by some.
>
> > > Thanks. --dawn
> > > <end quote>
>
> > > Who clumps it in with physical navigation?
>
> > The Third-Generation Database System Manifesto that I referred to
> > earlier is one such.
>
> I did a quick scan of this document, and found no references to "logical
> navigation".

No, I don't know if anyone uses that phrase except for me. It speaks only against navigation and I'm trying to figure out if it is only opposed to physical navigation rather than all database navigation. It was referred to in another document (ppt) I downloaded as a place to find information on why navigation is bad.

> There were many references to "physical navigation", and
> several references to "navigation" in general, but no references to
> "logical navigation".

That is my term. Again, I am still trying to figure what what people mean when they indicate that we as a profession have already learned that "database navigation" is a bad thing. What navigation is bad, what about navigation is bad, and why is it bad. I'm am not interested in anything related to physical navigation but to database navigation at a logical level (the level where a logical data model fits).

>
> Could you post an excerpt from the paper that argues against logical
> navigation?

It argues against navigation, which seems to start as what I am calling a "logical navigation" although he then moves to physical navigation to justify the anti-navigation stance (from what I can tell).

What type of navigation do you think that paper is arguing against? Thanks. --dawn Received on Thu Mar 01 2007 - 22:11:21 CET