True, we agree. If a house isn't built properly in the first place re-wiring 
with be inevitable. Nothing need
be changed if it's constructed to spec from the ground up. I just don't see 
where your 're' idea gets into the
mix.
-Lew 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike yearwood
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 4:57 PM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: RE: Object engineering #2

Hi Lew

> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 16:12:35 -0400
> From: "Lew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Object engineering #2 (Lew)
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I wasn't recommending that we give up using the controlsource 
> property/feature. I'm just attracting attention to the fact that a 
> direct reference to the data store subverts the intervention of 
> governance by the business and data layers. I don't understand your second 
> comment. Nothing needs to be
rewired if it's done properly in the first place.

For sake of clarification, if you built your application with direct references 
to the data store
(views/cursors, not directly to the
table) - you can still have the business objects 'govern' or 'manage'
access to the data store. If you choose to make the business objects 
micro-manage the data store you'd have to
change said applications'
forms to bind to the business objects - which I see as similar to re-wiring the 
house. :)


[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to