Formal Design Methodologies
-
What would "Formal Design Methodologies" be referring to within the realm of database architecture. I saw an add looking for a db architect with knowledge of logical and physical design (which makes sense), but then it also mentions faliliarity with formal design methodologies.
Any help would be great.
Thanks
-
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
-
Honestly I have no idea. I think that most want you to know the proper principals of normalization and when not to normalize. But the best way to find out what they mean is to ask. Many things that get thrown into job listings is concepts from other areas and they really don't know what they are asking, it just sounds good.
-
In the MSPRESS IT Edition series of books, it talks in several places about design methodologies, gives several charts explaining the roles of different participants, and goes into a lot of detail about the methods of making good applications and processes. I would guess he was talking about that. Its actually funny too. How many people even know that microsoft HAS official formal design methodologies? Even better, has anyone EVER seen them followed, ANYWHERE?
I bet the hiring manager saw it in a display.......
LMAO.....I buy and read absolutly tooooo many books...
-
Methodologies deal with both the diagramming conventions and the process by which you create your app. It's like a cookbook to what and how to go about writting software.
SSADM is a good example of a formal methodology:
http://www.comp.glam.ac.uk/pages/staff/tdhutchings/chapter4.html
-
The term "Formal Design Methodologies" would include things like database normalization techniques, process and data modelling. What gets done in what order, etc...
Something I found useful to get familar with was the Microsoft Solutions Framework. It contains a lot of these "buzz terms"
http://www.microsoft.com/business/services/mcsmsf.asp
Thanks
Phill Carter
--------------------
Colt 45 - the original point and click interface
-
That's the one, phillcart.
The other article, thanks to cwedgwood50, is excellent as well. The thing is, they all say the same thing when you get right down to it. A little planning, some consistent and logical methodology, etc...
Every IT department I have ever worked in had their own methodologies, and though suggestions were openly discussed and sometimes implemented, you were expected to conform. I say (here's that my opoinion thing again) that anyone having worked in oh, say, a few IT departments, is familiar with formal design methodologies. They may be good or bad, they may work or not. But they are familiar with the methods of design.
Over the years, I have watched this evolve from the five steps of good database creation in the late 80's to the microsoft triangle of good design in the early and mid 90's and then its done some really interesting shifting in just the last four or five years to a good variety of widly accepted methodologies and design styles. These are all ways of defining how to attack a problem.
I am all for people reading and learning and highly encourage it, but I really think either the hiring manager or person asking for these requirements should be more specific in what he/she means. Maybe they had something specific in mind, such as entity modeling. The conceptuals there are quite important. Maybe they use a specific methodology which they expect the person hired to already be familiar with. Maybe they have no clue, but saw it in the latest Sql Server magazine. I think its quite speculative as to what they meant.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply