Re: Why should the schema be in the bounded context?

The linguistic boundary applies to the model. Next to the model, there is the context. The context is simply everything where the model applies. For instance, an application or subsystem that consumes your model is in context. The schema, when its design is driven by the model, is in context.

In discussions with a domain expert context matters, but I wouldn't discuss it at the level of database schemas.

--- In [email protected], "tomas.jansson@..." <tomas.jansson@...> wrote:
>
> I'm reading Implementing DDD by Vaughn Vernon and have a couple of questions. I take them in separate posts so I don't mix the threads.
> 
> In the book he says you should keep the schema, if you have implemented it yourself, inside the boundary of the bounded context. That goes against the earlier statement that the bounded context should match the lingustic. I really doubt that the domain expert will talk about the database schema.
> 
> I guess what he tries to emphasize is that there are some technical aspects part of the bounded context as well that might not be part of the ubiquitous language. For example, if we have somekind of implementation detail like a factory for creating something it is part of bounded context but maybe not of the language you use when talking to the domain expert. To the domain expert you only mention the "thing" the factory creates.
> 
> Short version, why should the schema be part of the bounded context?
>



------------------------------------