On 19 Aug 2008 at 17:21, Eric Dannewitz wrote: > I have the experience.
It's too bad your posts to this list on this subject do not exhibit any evidence of that experience. > It is totally overkill setting up a huge relational thing Nobody suggested a "huge relational thing" -- that's a straw man that you've created in your own mind. > like that for what > the person wanted. Johannes did not provide enough information for you to make a judgment call on whether or not a relational database is the best for his needs. > They wanted simple. And I've proposed simple, starting with a pre-designed library template. > You and a couple of others give out > the most complex way of doing it. It's not the most complex in the long run, though it takes more work at the beginning. < That way works great for huge amounts of > data. It isn't really the best way in this case. "Best" is going to be determined by Johannes, not by you. You haven't made anything like a persuasive or coherent argument against a properly designed database -- you simply insist over and over again that the straw man "huge relational thing" is a bad idea. That's intellectually dishonest on your part since nobody proposed anything of the sort. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
