[QUANTITY] Data Model for Quantity v0.5
pdidelon at cea.fr
Wed May 5 08:26:15 PDT 2004
Ed Shaya wrote:
>> That's probably beacuse I yet do not see the word UTYPE mentioned ...
>> I understand that sophistication allows complete description of the
>> thing to be described,
>> on the other hand semplicity allows fast development, and fosters
>> usability by the other
>> working groups.
>> Shouldn't we first concentrate on the latter?
> No. You can not design a jet fighter by continuous improvement on a
Well! it depends of the point of view.
Speaking of human species, starting from neolithic up to nowdays,
something like that occurs, and it is not evident if a jet fighter
project starting ab nihilo would have succed in any achievement.
We may be need a bicycle first, and once we understand everything on the subject
we can try a car, and then go on.
Moreover, people needing only bicycle are then not force to use a jet.
I am deeply in favour of a very pragmatic bicycle.
I am really afraid by the lunar rocket style of the actual quantity model,
and I certainly don't understand half of the document.
Does people who would use these data types (data providers/VO actors...?)
feel confortable with this very complex construction?
The only thing, I think is promising (imho) is to forgot the implementation
(no mention of the data structure in term of data member or class attributes)
and concentrate on interface and method definition, leaving implementation
free and adjustable to the needs of any intervening party.
More information about the dm