Re: Result set requirements

* Rani Pinchuk
|
| See also http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2002/10/22/phrasebook.html
| although it is in Perl which I read you don't find that great :-),
| the article explains quite well (I hope), the advantages I found in
| that approach.

I definitely belong to the school of thought that says "you should use
the nice object-oriented approach," but I do agree that more complex
queries will have to be written directly in SQL (well, things like
JDOQL can deal with that, but let's ignore that for now). 

Still, with a good design you should be able to encapsulate those
without having to go all the way to a full phrasebook solution. I
think there's a tension, if not necessarily an outright conflict,
between phrasebooks and nice OO designs.
 
| Having seen such separation with ugly non OO architecture might be
| the reason that you are still skeptical about this attitude. 

Well, not only. As I said I think there is a general tension here.

| I have had totally different experience - the separation of the
| presentation details from the rest of the application (and the same
| with the separation between different languages - like SQL and the
| programming language around it) makes the application a lot cleaner,
| and REALLY gives the graphical designer the ability to change the
| look and feel of the application without needing the programmer
| help.

Here I tend to agree with Robert: really don't want graphical
designers messing with your Perl/Java/XML. Well, *I* don't, anyway. :)

BTW, Rani: did you do a use case solution document for Toma? If so,
could you repost the URL, because I can't find it. Thanks!

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >