[thelist] Must a webmaster know databases???

[Joshua OIson]

Makes sense to me.  I think, here again, to differentiate between a
webmaster and a web designer is important.  I have a few more messages to
read on this thread, then I'll expand.

-joshua

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Small" <peter at genps.demon.co.uk>
To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 5:01 PM
Subject: RE: [thelist] Must a webmaster know databases???


> Hi Scott,
>
> I have a completely different model to this because I'm thinking pure
> object oriented design. The Web master as you describe would be the kiss
of
> death to an organisation. He/she would become indispensible and the whole
> system would revolve around them and would be limited by their knowledge.
> He/she would have to be killed off.
>
> The specialists, as I visualise them, would not be the stagnated, slow
> moving behemoths as you describe. To me they would be the initiators and
> the pioneers: individuals or small groups, who create imaginative
functions
> that would be taking full advantage of the latest technology and the
newest
> trends. These modular functions would be the objects in an object oriented
> world.
>
> The entrepreneurial function would involve seeing these objects much the
> same way as a child would see a box of Lego components. He or she would
> build up a knowledge of the capabilities of these functions so as to be
> able to mix and combine them in imaginative ways to provide solutions.
They
> would be interchangeable and expendable to facilitate a highly flexible
and
> adaptive system.
>
> In other words, the entrepreneurial function would not be about getting
the
> specialists to create a business plan that they had devised. Instead, the
> entrepreneur would take the specialist functions as they are offered and,
> without changing them, put them to use as part of a modular system created
> entirely out of these components.
>
> Isn't this the way OOD works? In an object oriented system, objects don't
> have to know the internal organisation of other objects. It's about
sending
> messages and getting functional responses to those messages. To my mind,
> this means that an entrepreneur need have no knowledge of any specific
> application. They are responsible only for the output result of the total
> system. Their main function would be to act as the system's feedback loop.
>
> Does that make sense to anyone?
>
>
> peter
> http://www.petersmall.net
>
>
>
> >> If this attitude becomes prevelant, it would seem that the IT industry
> >> might revert to a pre industrial age infra structure, where
> >> you have large
> >> numbers of specialist craft masters (with apprentices) who provide a
> >> variety of specialist functions as services. This would not
> >> seem to be the
> >> best environment for the non specialist.
> >>
> >> This is a view I'm taking on a book I'm working on so I'd
> >> appreciate any
> >> comments that would counter this arguement.
> >
> >
> >I'd liken a 'webmaster' to a small, nimble company in this context,
whereas
> >a specialist would be portrayed as the large behemoth conglomerate that
> >moves very slowly.
> >
> >I think of it like this: as a specialist in one area and one area alone,
it
> >can be all too easy to apply that specialty to the task, regardless of
> >context or need. Further, the learning curve to reach a new specialty to
> >include as a core competency is very great, and would take a significant
> >amount of time. A company we've come to term as "old school brick and
> >mortar" would operate in much the same fashion. Consider IBM in the years
> >prior to the purging of its top management and subsequent entry (and huge
> >success) in the laptop market in the early 1990's. Prior to that, IBM
> >epitomized the 'old school' management and operation style that prevented
it
> >from moving swiftly to market shifts and increased customer empowerment.
> > A Jack-of-All-Trades, on the other hand, has a base knowledge of a
> >number of technologies and could have the awareness and savvy to be able
to
> >apply the best tool for the problem at hand. A small company that does
not
> >have the strict and deep trenches of management and dedicated
single-track
> >processes can adapt quickly to market shifts and the changing whims of
their
> >customers.
> >
> >Seen like this, a 'webmaster' then, in my mind, is much more valuable,
and
> >placed in the right position, can orchestrate a team of specialists. This
> >leads me to a military view, where a webmaster is a general --king of
theory
> >and process, wielding his arsenal of specialties to rid the problem at
hand.
> >
> >sgd
> >
> >---------------------------------------
> >For unsubscribe and other options, including
> >the Tip Harvester and archive of TheList go to:
> >http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
> For unsubscribe and other options, including
> the Tip Harvester and archive of TheList go to:
> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !