On Tue, 28 Dec 1999, Greg Kreis wrote:
> David Forslund wrote:
> > Perhaps, equally valid, is to use UML (which can be generated from the IDL, if
>desired).
>
> This would be refreshing -- specifications without regard to a specific
> technology so we can avoid these 'my language/database bests your
> language/database' issues.
I agree. This whole discussion started as a comparison of various existing
data models (including VistA). At this stage, I think we would do well to
work at the modelling level, and I think UML would be a good approach. My
perspective on VistA (for example) is that it is a successful system and
one we should not ignore -- whether or not MUMPS is used as an
implementation language. The same comment could be applied to any of a
number of technologies or systems.
---
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.wnetc.com/home.html
"An atheist staring from his attic window is often nearer to God than the
believer caught up in his own false image of God."
--Martin Buber
