And there is one reader's imagination...

Post #152,251 by ben_tilly 4/22/04 4:23:30 PM Reply	And there is one reader's imagination... To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act - [link\|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20\|Nebraska Supreme Court]
Post #152,270 by tablizer 4/22/04 6:18:16 PM Reply	Dr. Codd was hallucinating? He saw the problems with the navigational DB's and sought to clean them up. He tossed pointers and path hopping and replaced it with relational algebra ("table math"). OO proponents complain that behavior is now integrated into modern versions of navigational structures, and so they are allegedly different and better. But, they are not. Behavior can also be put in tables (AKA Control Tables), but I often find that the relationship between behavior and data is too often not strong enough to justify it that often. It would help things a bit, but not revolutionary. OO dogma over-couples behavior and data for the sake of dogma itself I believe, not out of any natural affinity or relationship, at least not found in "business objects". ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #152,272 by jb4 4/22/04 6:27:08 PM Reply	Re: Dr. Codd was hallucinating? Wasn't he the one who came up with the concept of the Object Database? jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #152,274 by Another Scott 4/22/04 6:38:44 PM Reply	Doesn't look like it. [link\|http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/People/clamen/OODBMS/Manifesto/htManifesto/Manifesto.html\|The OO Database System Manifesto]'s Introduction: Whereas Codd's original paper [Codd 70] gave a clear specification of a relational database system (data model and query language), no such specification exists for object-oriented database systems [Maier 89]. We are not claiming here that no complete object-oriented data model exists, indeed many proposals can be found in the literature (see [Albano et al. 1986], [L\\'ecluse and Richard 89], [Carey et al. 88] as examples), but rather that there is no consensus on a single one. Opinion is slowly converging on the gross characteristics of a family of object-oriented systems, but, at present, there is no clear consensus on what an object-oriented system is, let alone an object-oriented database system. The second characteristic of the field is the lack of a strong theoretical framework. To compare object-oriented programming to logic programming, there is no equivalent of [Van Emdem and Kowalski 76]. The need for a solid underlying theory is obvious: the semantics of concepts such as types or programs are often ill defined. The absence of a solid theoretical framework, makes consensus on the data model almost impossible to achieve. [...] It is important to agree now on a definition of an object-oriented database systems. As a first step towards this goal, this paper suggests characteristics that such systems should possess. We expect that the paper will be used as a straw man, and that others will either invalidate or confirm the points mentioned here. Note that this paper is not a survey of the state of the art on OODBS technology and do not pretend to assess the current status of the technology, it merely proposes a set of definitions. Just hoping to fan the flames to get more light than heat this time around. :-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #152,280 by ben_tilly 4/22/04 8:04:59 PM Reply	It was a reference to an earlier post Specifically this one, What parallels should be drawn to the subject of OO programming is left to the imagination* of the reader.* Cheers, Ben To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act - [link\|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20\|Nebraska Supreme Court]

Welcome to IWETHEY!