You searched for the word(s): 5
[quote user="Andy Carver"] But even if you have a choice, the presumable condition is that both ways must yield an accurate model. After all, the first and foremost job of the modeler is to model the domain accurately. A[/quote]
You raise an excellent point.
We clearly have different notions of what an ...
Oh, this domain doesn't care about working at all... Assume all claimants are Veterans of Foreign wars any country. So now you want to determine what country they are from and if you can't figure it out you'll give them a default living expense of country code af. Some of the claimants are in pretty bad shape and have ...
I hate to tell you, but you're our domain expert, by default :-) As such, I've got to tell you, I don't understand how someone could be all three: working for a Federal Agency (recorded), working for a Public Organization (recorded), and at the very same time, having their employment "not listed".
I was ...
Yes in this domain you can have all three, or any combination of nulls or country codes. The idea in the domain I'm working off of assumes that its important to have as much data as possible filled out as well as a default value in case no country code was found. So to sumarize, a claimant can be "Investigated by" Federal ...
Thanks for the clarifications. As it happens, the particular, nitpicky modeling issue our current discussion swings on, is whether, in my model, the exclusion constraint holds. That is, is it possible for, say, a Claimant to work both for a Public Organization, and for a Federal Agency?
There are other ...
I think I'm way over my head on this one. But I can make some basic logical declarations about this particular domain.
A Claimant can only have one country code in this domain used to determine living expenses.
A Federal Agency object, an organization object, and a Claimant object can either have a country code with a ...
You responded to my first critique -- wherein I said that since a Claimant couldn't work both for a Federal Agency and for a Public Organization, your ternary was non-elementary (and needs splitting). Your response was, mainly, that
"If you look closely at my diagram, you will see that I have specified three ...
Dear Mr Darwen:
The only perjorative in my intent was against those who have come to think the SQL is a good example of the relational model! That is, I used the word "purist" to avoid confusion with the popular misunderstanding of "relational".
I bet you get very tired of being drawn into this kind of debate, with people who ...
Perhaps I can do as good a job re-phrasing my statement, as you've done re-phrasing yours. I will try, in any case. But maybe what i need is to unpack, rather than condense... Anyway, my point was this:
If you, or anyone else, should happen to put forward the principle that "An object-role model ...
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I think it is better to state propositions so that people can either agree or disagree, rather than using long, complex and "befuddling" sentences. So here are my two propositions
1. My sample model illustrates a principle.
2. We do not have an accurate model of Marc's domain.