On 14/04/2014 02:51:59, "Ove Kåven" <[email protected]> wrote:
That's also part of my reason for replying. I'm always trying to
improve my own methods for communicating abstract ideas.
Which is why I tried to fit the ideas in SQL. It's the formalized data
language I'm most familiar with.
I'm sometimes amazed by Patrick, too. He's very patient (way more than
I am), he almost always explains things thoroughly, he clearly knows
what he's doing most of the time, and yet, over the years, I've seen
several examples of his explanations missing the mark. Like everyone
else, he's learning - and to that end, he often asks people for
comments on how to explain these things better. Sadly, in general,
people never give a proper answer to that.
My answer to that has been to try to capture the ideas in a tutorial,
including the abstract concepts involved. Whether or not such an answer
is proper is not for me to decide.
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution
