Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker <danielaparker@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 09:21:02 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 7, 7:26 am, S Perryman <q...@xxxxx> wrote:
Daniel Parker wrote:
[ ... ]
You have answered my question.
ODBC is an open *API* (service interface) , but does not have an
open info exchange format.
It is therefore a lower form than something such as OSI, CORBA etc.
I don't think "lower form" is a term that's all that meaningful when
talking about interoperability and open standards, it's not a term you
normally find in a standards document. Besides, I think Dmitry might
object to your characterization of a standard data format as a higher
form than a standard API :-), but in any case I think the term is
meaningless here, it's more appropriate when talking about vampires
and dark magicians.
1. Actually I wrote :
<quote>
If you can't tell me what REQ and REPLY are, you don't
understand anything about inter-operability, or open standards
</quote>
That's true, if the premise is false, then logically the conclusion
doesn't follow, and I had already explained everything I thought I had
to about REQ and REPLY, and referred you to the specifications for
more details. To be honest, I didn't think you were being that
subtle.
My sole goal in these posts is to respond to these statements of
2. Based on what I've seen (non-understanding of the difference between
an open user API, and an open REP/REPLY format, and the fact that
something that has only one is more restricted - proprietary - than
something that has both) , no surprise is it.
yours:
<SP>Can I have an Oracle front-end requesting SQL services on a back-
end that
I have written myself ??
<SP>If there is an ODBC client C, and a database server S with ODBC
capability, then if a developer is using a C provided by vendor V1
(C-V1) , then they must also use the S provided by V1 (S-V1) ??
I wanted to show you that the answer to the first question is a
qaulified "yes", that for many Oracle clients that can connect to
Oracle, the answer is "yes".
And I wanted to show you that the answer to the second question is
"no."
You say you wanted to show me show me "the fallacy in [my] argument,
and [my] misunderstanding of the most fundamental concepts", but I
don't recall making an argument, I was simply explaining to you how
interoperability works with tooling in the SQL industry, as it exists
today. I tried to bring in as much detail as possible so I could
convey to you how it works. New servers are being introduced all the
time, and existing clients are able to connect to them quite happily.
It's like the Atlantic ocean, all you can say is that it's there,
there's not much point "arguing" about it.
I for one have learnt something : I must not assume the basic concepts
of open systems are understood in industry.
I think the lesson you should learn is from Mark Twain:
"It's not what we don't know that hurts us, it's what we know for
certain that just ain't so."
If anything I feel I will have to prepare some literature for future
use, in case the misunderstandings you have might be widespread.
I could suggest some readings for you about open standards in SQL data
formats, if you're interested in pursuing that subject. You might
want to read up on the ISO SQL/XML standard, see http://www.sqlx.org/.
-- Daniel
.
- References:
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: topmind
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: topmind
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- From: S Perryman
- Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- Prev by Date: Re: Measuring Coupling and Cohesion
- Next by Date: Re: Measuring Coupling and Cohesion
- Previous by thread: Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- Next by thread: Re: Database Model - Class, objects and interaction [LONG]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading