Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 24/09/2012 17:12, Costello, Roger L. wrote: > Hi Folks, > > How carefully do you specify your data? Is it free from ambiguity and misinterpretation? > > Data is *never* free from ambiguity and misinterpretation, however careful you are: any more than English prose is ever unambiguous. Being too careful can make things worse, because the longer and more formal the spec, the fewer people will read it. And being too careful can make systems too rigid, preventing people from sharing the data that they want to make available. Just ask two TV people to agree what they mean by a "channel", or two airline people what they mean by a "flight", or two software people to agree what they mean by a "bug". The fact is that in everyday conversation we use fuzzy terms all the time. Of course, we've all heard of systems problems caused by failure to agree these definitions. My favourite anecdote is a lottery system in which the word "retailer" (and the retailer ID) was used variously to describe the premises on which tickets were sold, and the company that owned or leased those premises; and "terminal" (and terminal ID) was used variously to describe the physical piece of equipment in the shop, and the network endpoint to which it was plugged in. It all worked well so long as there was an unchanging one-to-one relationship between these objects. But this particular system was astoundingly successful in that it was built and went live within about six months, and once it did so, there was plenty of cashflow available to fix the problems. Michael Kay Saxonica
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
