Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- From: Ian Goddard <goddai01@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:03:26 +0100
Bob Velke wrote:
Ian said:
How do you represent this? There is no repository. Even if one were to designate the cemetery as the repository it no longer contains the evidence.
That is irrelevant. The objective is to document where you got the evidence, not the present location of that evidence.
You could consider each and every copy of the publication as the top level of the hierarchy.
Unless you consulted each and every copy of the publication, they are not your source.
I'd suggest that one objective is to tell anyone else where they can see the evidence for themselves in which case in which case any copy will suffice. The term "each and every" was considered. *Each* copy is a source in its own right but one would give a reference to the edition as a whole, which covers *every* copy.
In any event your objections do not deal with my point: there are sources which don't fit nicely into the concept of a repository at the top of the hierarchy. And the model doesn't even need it. The rest of the hierarchy is the source entity/class which has a pointer to a higher level source - just the way to implement a hierarchy whilst remaining open-ended as to the number of levels. All you need is to accept that the pointer to the higher source can be null where it's the top level and you don't need a separate entity/class to cap the hierarchy.
In other respects it's not bold enough. For instance the UML labels some objects with a UID (unique identifier) to replace the primary database key of the original model: "A UID is only required to be unique amongst the instances in its class". A moment's thought shows that this isn't likely to be true.
You are quoting from Stanley Mitchell's reference model in UML, not the GDM itself. Keys are used in the GDM in order to construct a logical model. As an abstraction, the GDM deliberately avoids describing a physical model or implementation, including the system or authority for unique identifiers that a developer might use.
The GDM has a discussion about what makes a good key. What I suggest is that there would have been considerable benefit in a bit of lateral thinking here. I suspect that the GDM has been influenced, consciously or otherwise, by RDBMS approach and in particular data types such as SERIAL in Informix or Identity in Sequel Server. I've used this as an approach to glue systems together in the past. However in this case I'd suggest that there's merit in thinking a little more about the meaning of "unique". Surely one of the benefits of using a standard model is that data from the model can be shared. And this means that there should be some means of ensuring that "unique" means "unique" across all databases.
--
Ian
Hotmail is for spammers. Real mail address is igoddard
at nildram co uk
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- From: Bob Velke
- Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- References:
- Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- From: Richard Smith
- Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- From: Ian Goddard
- Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- From: Bob Velke
- Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- Prev by Date: Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- Next by Date: Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- Previous by thread: Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- Next by thread: Re: Software implementing Gentech Genealogical Data Model
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading