From: chris@dickinson.uk.net   
      
   On Thursday, 26 April 2018 18:38:00 UTC+1, Jon Green  wrote:   
   > On 26/04/2018 16:34, Ian Goddard wrote:   
   > > The real problem is that genealogical software designers get sucked in    
   > > by the siren call of a tree.  Trees are a well known computer science    
   > > construct so /obviously/ designing the application as a tree builder is    
   > > the right answer.  Except that it isn't.   
   >    
   > Agreed. And neither is a conventional (SQL) database, as they seriously    
   > impede flexibility.   
   >    
   > I'd suggest - for the developers and techies here - that a NoSQL    
   > database like MongoDB is the ideal implementation. Because there's no    
   > schema (fixed layout of columns), it's easy to extend it, or add    
   > arbitrary user-defined fields on a per-record basis. Records need    
   > contain only the entries they require. It's easy to set up links between    
   > records. It's very scalable. What's not to like?   
   >    
   > Jon   
   > --    
   > Maintainer, soc.genealogy.britain FAQs: www.genealogy-britain.org.uk   
   >          ***    WATCH OUT FOR THE SPAM BLOCK!    ***   
   > Replace 'deadspam' with 'green-lines' to reply in email!   
   >    
   > ---   
   > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.   
   > https://www.avast.com/antivirus   
      
   Last year, I tried to use it, but for some reason couldn't get it to work.   
   Hence, my trek to Zoho.   
      
   Chris   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)