Re: Designing a structure for a personal database

Lew <lew@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>David Segall wrote:
>> The history of computing has been about finding the "true correct"
>> data model or user interface and _then_ optimising features including
>> the ones you list. 
>
>That is completely false.
>  Studies and experience have consistently shown that 
>there is more than one "correct" solution for almost every software 
>requirement.  The history of computing has notably omitted attempts to
find 
>any "true correct" data model or user interface, and has focused instead
on 
>elucidating principles by which *a* correct solution can be found in any
given 
>situation.
I believe that the relational database, the spreadsheet, the Xerox
Alto user interface, the Java-style virtual machine, hypertext and the
world wide web are all examples of the "correct" model. Each of those
models was so intuitively right that they persisted despite the fact
that many of the early implementations were unacceptable. Of course,
those historical milestones do not contradict your second sentence.
>
>> I believed my original post indicated that I had thought about the
>> problem, looked at other people's solutions and that I was coming to
>> you because I was not satisfied with anything I had seen so far. I
>> assumed that the post spoke for itself and, even if it did not, a
>> respondent would do a Google search before making assumptions about
>> the poster. Clearly, my post was not as lucid as it seemed to me
>> because this is the fourth response based on an elementary database
>> design course. I was seeking a breakthrough data model of a personal
>> address book that one of you had thought of in the shower this
>> morning. 
>
>In other words, you couldn't come up with the idea, and since Ed and
others 
>didn't, now it's their fault.
I apologise for the grumpy tone. I am frustrated that I can't come up
with a simple model for what seems like a simple application but I am
certainly not blaming anyone else.