Dear David and Kingsley,
I agree re the technology of DBMSs at the
time of Lotus123’s release. However, the problem still hasn’t
been “seamlessly” solved even today. Kingsley is right in
principle; spreadsheets, documents, all kinds of daily used conceptual tools
SHOULD be very simple to post into cells, tables, columns and rows of relations
in DBMSs. The best current approach is to use the BLOB (binary large
object) domain in most modern DBMSs, but that is by no means “seamless”.
Such daily tools fit Ridley’s
concept of knowledge sharing in principle, but the actuality of today’s
DBMSs aren’t easy for nonprogrammers (the majority of users) to integrate
their models and conclusions with other individuals.
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Eddy
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2012
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology
On Apr 7, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
I couldn't understand why Lotus 123 and other productivity tools
didn't have seamless hooks into back-end relational databases :-)
And what sort of hoops/contortions would you have had to jump through
to get to a serious production database data from engines such as SYS2000,
M204, IMS, IDMS, or Adabas or <gasp> flat files like VSAM?
Let us not to forget that RDBMSs were primarily interesting experiments
in the 1980s, slowly moving into serious production status in the early 1990s.