Quoting Hans Bakker <[email protected]>:
Hi Ardrian
Sorry for the late reply, i thought it was good to wait a couple of days....
please find my answers in-line.
Regards,
Hans
Hans,
I apologize for the terse response and waving you off. I was
feeling a bit frustrated by this thread - not because of the
conversation contained in it, but because of the history of you
asking for advice, and when that advice is given, you argue against
it.
Apology accepted.
Yes sure, advice is welcome but when i do not agree with the advice
I can and will argue against it, I do not see anything wrong with
this? Apparently you do?
I wasn't trying to appear superior. My response was based on the
simple idea of closing your eyes and picturing the job interview
process. If you take the time to do that, it should be obvious that
the process may include a number of communication events, but is
not itself a communication event. If you can't picture that, then
maybe it's best to just leave the model alone.
Sure, but you as the calendar expert you should have known that we
want interview dates to appear on the calendar? This can, according
to me, best be done by creating a related workeffort event and this
information should not be added to the 'interview' entity as you
suggest. Location? this also can be referenced on the same
workeffort by means of the facilityId... So really, i do not see the
need of an "Interview" entity at all.
So, yes sorry, i still think the communication event is fine because
it has the advantage that it can list the interviews together with
all emails and telephone calls, so to list all communications using
the existing functionality.....AND this is following the data model
book.....
I'm not a data modelling expert, but I do manage to get models
right most of the time. When I get it wrong, I will be the first
one to point it out. There are other areas of development that I am
not skilled in. In those I cases I simply follow the advice of
others and trust they are leading me in the right direction.
From my perspective, the developer community is composed of skilled
analysts, architects, programmers, etc - but I don't believe any
one person is all of those things. If the individuals in the
developer community see things that way, then consequently there is
an acknowledgement that there are some things we as individuals
don't know or understand. Some people believe that kind of
acknowledgement is a sign of weakness, but I see it as the
beginning of wisdom.
Sorry but the last two paragraphs are a bit too cloudy for me.....
I was trying to say in a polite way that maybe you should consider the
possibility that data modelling is not one of your stronger skills,
and trust the advice of others who are better at it.
-Adrian
