Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!pmafire!mica.inel.gov!gem-hy!cdm From: cdm@gem-hy.Berkeley.EDU (Dale Cook) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: ER versus dependency normalization methods. Message-ID: <1990Dec11.210145.11436@inel.gov> Date: 11 Dec 90 21:01:45 GMT References: <358@6sigma.UUCP> <34324@netnews.upenn.edu> <1990Dec11.003251.4494@inel.gov> <2370@edat.UUCP> Sender: news@inel.gov Reply-To: cdm@gem-hy.Berkeley.EDU (Dale Cook) Organization: Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho Lines: 62 In article <2370@edat.UUCP>, brian@edat.UUCP (brian douglass personal account) writes: |> |> In this life I am now looking at CASE tools to automate the whole |> analysis and design process. In particular I have been interested in |> the teamwork series by Ingres/Cadre and IDE's software through |> pictures. |> |> Since these products claim not only to assist in the diagramming |> of systems, but also the creation of database schemas and relationships, |> how useful has anyone found them to be? I mean going from user |> interviews to actual data models was always a hair puller at best, |> but now may be a moot point, the tool does it all for you (scarry!). |> Some tools will not only generate all of your schemas, but even your |> 4gl code! |> We use IDE's STP. While a good product, it won't do the hard part that you mention: going from user interviews to ER to logical design. It is more of a documentary tool for these purposes, to give you pretty pictures. The mundane job of taking a good logical model to physical schemas is there. However, the really tough job of interview->ER->logical design is still a human process. |> So how about it. Are CASE tools going to relieve us all the need |> to decide between ER and DN, and do it all for us? Sort of like |> microwave brownies. Pour in the interviews, mix all around, |> nuke for 3 minutes and presto, instant system! |> |> Maybe someday. Remember when 3GL code generators (e.g., COBOL) were going to make programmers obsolete? The same claims are surfacing in the data analysis world. I'll believe it when I see it. Don't get me wrong. CASE tools are valuable. They can take care of many mundane tasks, and make fewer errors in the process. A large part of their value lies in the forced rigor involved in getting the specifications to them. The key here, however, is that CASE tools are just that - tools. They still require human operators, and skilled ones at that. Until a complete CASE system arrives which takes some yet to be determined specification language and turns it into a finished, working system, they will not replace the current methods, IMHO. And even IF that day arrives, you'll need a data analyst, system analyst, and programmer rolled into one to use it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Dale Cook cdm@inel.gov "The only stupid question is the unasked one." The following disclaimer is my employer's. No flames, please. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip =========== ^L Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever, implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. No specific reference constitutes or implies endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.