A Microsoft Office (Excel, Word) forum. OfficeFrustration

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » OfficeFrustration forum » Microsoft Access » Database Design
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  

A proposal for specifying data requirements



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 2nd, 2008, 11:35 PM posted to microsoft.public.access.tablesdbdesign
Evan Keel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default A proposal for specifying data requirements

I've been watching this group for a couple of months now and have noticed
that most design questions are posed in narrative form. I propose we come up
with a "language" to descibe the data requirements. For example:

An Employee works on many Projects as Role (examples: Manager, Designer,
QA, etc.
A Project has many Employees working on it.

A Deparment has many Employees
An Employee works in one department

An Employee worked on Project for WeekEndingDate as Role for Hours.

If we could express "data facts" in such a manner, it would be much easier
to offer design advice. I am not proposing a strict
specification language, just something where we get an idea of relationships
among tables and and relationships among tables and columns.

Also, posters should at least post their first pass at a solution.

All the best,

Eva n


  #2  
Old April 3rd, 2008, 12:20 AM posted to microsoft.public.access.tablesdbdesign
John W. Vinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,261
Default A proposal for specifying data requirements

On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:35:36 GMT, "Evan Keel" wrote:

An Employee works on many Projects as Role (examples: Manager, Designer,
QA, etc.
A Project has many Employees working on it.

A Deparment has many Employees
An Employee works in one department

An Employee worked on Project for WeekEndingDate as Role for Hours.

If we could express "data facts" in such a manner, it would be much easier
to offer design advice. I am not proposing a strict
specification language, just something where we get an idea of relationships
among tables and and relationships among tables and columns.

Also, posters should at least post their first pass at a solution.


All very good ideas... but how will you inform the unending stream of new
Access designers coming to these newsgroups for the first time? Bear in mind
that even if we could post a daily FAQ or recommended posting style, very few
folks would read it.

So... who will bell the cat, asked the mouse?
--

John W. Vinson [MVP]
  #3  
Old April 3rd, 2008, 12:37 AM posted to microsoft.public.access.tablesdbdesign
Jeff Boyce
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,621
Default A proposal for specifying data requirements

Your suggestions seem like a variant on describing entity-relationships, but
perhaps with an Object-Role twist.

Yes, a "convention" for defining the data requirements could help.

As John points out, folks who don't know/use the convention will still post
using their own explanations.

And even someone who understands the convention may not understand his/her
situation well enough to define it with that level of precision. Sometimes
the very first step in designing an application is helping the user clarify
just what it is s/he is after!

Good luck!

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

"Evan Keel" wrote in message
et...
I've been watching this group for a couple of months now and have noticed
that most design questions are posed in narrative form. I propose we come
up
with a "language" to descibe the data requirements. For example:

An Employee works on many Projects as Role (examples: Manager, Designer,
QA, etc.
A Project has many Employees working on it.

A Deparment has many Employees
An Employee works in one department

An Employee worked on Project for WeekEndingDate as Role for Hours.

If we could express "data facts" in such a manner, it would be much easier
to offer design advice. I am not proposing a strict
specification language, just something where we get an idea of
relationships
among tables and and relationships among tables and columns.

Also, posters should at least post their first pass at a solution.

All the best,

Eva n




  #4  
Old April 3rd, 2008, 02:26 AM posted to microsoft.public.access.tablesdbdesign
binny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default A proposal for specifying data requirements

Your right, but first you learn to speak the the language there is not much
point in asking a Russian for directions in French!
Five days ago when I set out to build a database for my local sports
Association. The only thing I knew about access, was that is where publisher
stored my mailing list.
The first thing I did was contact my local technical College. Who gave me
the link to VTC.com (no doubt there are plenty of other similar web sites out
there. If you look)
I took their online course on access and four days later. I have a database
capable of handling the thousands of different record combinations that go
with the different classes age groups and heats of our sporting events. I'm
now looking at automating some of the functions. So that means back to
VTC.com for a course in Visual Basic's.
Yesterday was the first time I've posted a message on this site and the
first thing that struck me was. There are quite a few people posting here
who have absolutely no idea of the power of Access. So my first advice to
any of these people would would be go to VTC.com, or a similar site and take
a course. They are excellent value.
--
binny


"Evan Keel" wrote:

I've been watching this group for a couple of months now and have noticed
that most design questions are posed in narrative form. I propose we come up
with a "language" to descibe the data requirements. For example:

An Employee works on many Projects as Role (examples: Manager, Designer,
QA, etc.
A Project has many Employees working on it.

A Deparment has many Employees
An Employee works in one department

An Employee worked on Project for WeekEndingDate as Role for Hours.

If we could express "data facts" in such a manner, it would be much easier
to offer design advice. I am not proposing a strict
specification language, just something where we get an idea of relationships
among tables and and relationships among tables and columns.

Also, posters should at least post their first pass at a solution.

All the best,

Eva n



  #5  
Old April 3rd, 2008, 06:33 PM posted to microsoft.public.access.tablesdbdesign
Evan Keel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default A proposal for specifying data requirements


"John W. Vinson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:35:36 GMT, "Evan Keel"

wrote:

An Employee works on many Projects as Role (examples: Manager, Designer,
QA, etc.
A Project has many Employees working on it.

A Deparment has many Employees
An Employee works in one department

An Employee worked on Project for WeekEndingDate as Role for Hours.

If we could express "data facts" in such a manner, it would be much

easier
to offer design advice. I am not proposing a strict
specification language, just something where we get an idea of

relationships
among tables and and relationships among tables and columns.

Also, posters should at least post their first pass at a solution.


All very good ideas... but how will you inform the unending stream of new
Access designers coming to these newsgroups for the first time? Bear in

mind
that even if we could post a daily FAQ or recommended posting style, very

few
folks would read it.

So... who will bell the cat, asked the mouse?
--

John W. Vinson [MVP]


Hmm..excellent points. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Evan


  #6  
Old April 3rd, 2008, 10:34 PM posted to microsoft.public.access.tablesdbdesign
Evan Keel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default A proposal for specifying data requirements

Yes! ER + ORM. The problem with ORM is that it results in very big diagrams.
Every attribute is a symbol. But what ORM and NIAM do well is looking at
the data world as a set of facts.

Evan
"Jeff Boyce" wrote in message
...
Your suggestions seem like a variant on describing entity-relationships,

but
perhaps with an Object-Role twist.

Yes, a "convention" for defining the data requirements could help.

As John points out, folks who don't know/use the convention will still

post
using their own explanations.

And even someone who understands the convention may not understand his/her
situation well enough to define it with that level of precision.

Sometimes
the very first step in designing an application is helping the user

clarify
just what it is s/he is after!

Good luck!

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

"Evan Keel" wrote in message
et...
I've been watching this group for a couple of months now and have

noticed
that most design questions are posed in narrative form. I propose we

come
up
with a "language" to descibe the data requirements. For example:

An Employee works on many Projects as Role (examples: Manager,

Designer,
QA, etc.
A Project has many Employees working on it.

A Deparment has many Employees
An Employee works in one department

An Employee worked on Project for WeekEndingDate as Role for Hours.

If we could express "data facts" in such a manner, it would be much

easier
to offer design advice. I am not proposing a strict
specification language, just something where we get an idea of
relationships
among tables and and relationships among tables and columns.

Also, posters should at least post their first pass at a solution.

All the best,

Eva n






 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 OfficeFrustration.
The comments are property of their posters.