Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: (data) medium is the message
 I'm in violent agreement with the thread at this point. Business people want to think in terms of whatever is "intuitive," and that usually means there is a need for intermediaries to construct at least part of a solution, or be a sounding board. BTW, I think UML's visualization of use-cases trivializes the concept and execution there-of. I'm more impressed with the effectiveness of XPers' user stories and Cockburn's approaches using structured narratives. (I still don't get the use-case for having the Reply-to go to an individual.) Hunsberger, Peter wrote: > Arg, bitten once again. Yes, this was meant for public consumption... > > Peter Hunsberger > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] >>Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 6:39 PM >>To: Hunsberger, Peter >>Subject: RE: (data) medium is the message >> >> >>This is cool - did you mean to send it to the list? >> >> >>Peter.Hunsberger@s... (Hunsberger, Peter) writes: >> >> >>>Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@s...> writes: >>> >>> >>>>Peter.Hunsberger@s... (Hunsberger, Peter) writes: >>>> >>>>>Although I can understand this vision and even buy into >> >>some of it I >> >>>>>wonder how close it is? >>>> >>>>It's not close. The vast majority of people are going down >>>>the "we need prior agreement on all semantics" path. I >>>>translate that as "we need information totalitarianism", but >>>>it's painfully common. >>> >>>We're more at "we need some agreement on the use case" stage >> >>of things. >> >>>Sure, when arguing use cases one does end up arguing >> >>semantics but only >> >>>to make sure you're all actually working on the same use >> >>case. Again, >> >>>I'm not >>>a huge fan of UML and less so of RUP but I do like having a use case >>>hanging >>>around for everyone to aim at. >>> >>><snip/> >>> >>>>>From the metadata we generate schema. What we don't do >> >>is arrive at >> >>>>>these business rules by bouncing data around until we get it >>>> >>>>right and >>>> >>>>>frankly I don't see how we could. >>>> >>>>"Bouncing data around" is, of course, how business rules >>>>emerged in the human world. When I was a sales assistant, if >>>>I got a fax I didn't understand, I took it to my boss or to >>>>the warehouse or whoever I needed to talk with about how to >>>>handle it, and learned from that experience. >>> >>>And if the business was big your boss probably handed you a SOP >>>manual... >>> >>><big snip/> >>> >>>>And I've argued for years that secretaries know more about >>>>office information than anyone in the company, so I'm >>>>obviously coming from a different perspective. I've actually >>>>done this myself, building a database that did most of my >>>>job's menial tasks with minimal intervention, so I know it's >>>>quite possible, but the social milieu isn't there at present. >>>> >>>> >>>>>Maybe Joe user can do top down >>>>>development, but that means stepping back and >> >>understanding the big >> >>>>>picture and that's not something that everyone can do. So I >>>> >>>>think for >>>> >>>>>the next couple of years there's still going to be a need >>>> >>>>for Frank the >>>> >>>>>IT guy, or at least Frank the consultant who helps you build some >>>>>schema. >>>> >>>>For a long time, sure. But it's time to start exercising >>>>some imagination and asking what else we can do. Trading >>>>pre-defined data is boring, to put it mildly, >>> >>>Having business processes in place that work might be boring >> >>but that's >> >>>what's needed for the most part? >>> >>> >>>>and top-down >>>>development requires trusting the top. I don't trust the >>>>perspective that people at the top or looking from the >>>>top of a problem seem to share; I never have. >>> >>>Well if the secretaries are the ones with the knowledge >> >>that's who you >> >>>talk >>>to get your business rules... Let me be clear, when I say >> >>we document >> >>>business rules I don't mean the developers. I mean the business >>>analysts >>>(who wouldn't know a DTD from a XSD at the best of times) >> >>and the end >> >>>users >>>(who might know how to use Excel and maybe Brio). The analysts are >> >>also >> >>>the >>>people who create and review the metadata. The developers tweak the >>>metadata to make it consumable by our applications, but that's more >>>because the current state of the art (the mapping tools) >> >>then anything >> >>>else... >>> >>> >>>>Frank the IT guy's job is safe. I'd just like to develop >>>>systems that include people beyond Frank the IT guy, people >>>>who may not know a lot about XSLT or C, but do know about the >>>>actual subject matter they're working with. >>> >>>Absolutely, that's why I say the end user needs Frank the IT >> >>guys help >> >>>to >>>create the schema, not the other way around... >>> >> >>-- >>Simon St.Laurent >>Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets >>Errors, errors, all fall down! >>http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org >> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> > > 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
