Really value identity means something that you wouldn't need a database ID for, so you can embed the value as fields in a table if you want. But you are supposed to pretend that you aren't talking about implementation.

How about displaying the category of licence as part of the code project site? Many people aren't clear about what terms their code can be used, or, if they are, it's only clear after downloading the source. I wouldn't want GPL licenced code banned, but if I'm looking to use something for work it would be nice to be able to quickly know what articles to skip over. Do you like the way I turned a poll question into a feature request? :sigh:

In principle, a computational device does not need to create any heat if no information is lost in the computation. This usually means returning the question along with the answer at the end of a computation. So now we have the design, we just need those engineer types to work out the details.

Does anybody agree with me that SQL from procedural code would be a lot easier if SQL were exposed as relational algebra rather than it's own vaguely English-like syntax? Query.Table.Add(tblOrderDetail); Query.Join.Add(tblOrder.ID,tblOrderDetail.Order) ... would make building server-side queries on the client programmatically a lot easier than now, when you have to write code to figure out where to put the commas and stuff like that. Does the SQL language actually make life easier for anyone who really works with relational databases, or does it just make it easier for people to play with Microsoft Access (and even then people just use the query builder)?

My worst interview was during the .COM boom, when I interviewed to be a database designer for a startup web site. When I arrived, the office was filled with about 40 people, most of whom seemed to have no experience whatsoever, as I discovered by chatting with people during the very long wait. The first thing they did was to give me a long personality test. Multiple choice. Then someone who appeared to be a secretary told me that the company is run based on the principles of Scientology, and did I have a problem with that? Since I had already wasted my day and at that point it seemed that there was at least a slight chance that one of the principles of Scientology as they understood it might be to hand large bags of cash to spiritually promising interviewees I said that I wasn't familiar with Scientology but I'd keep an open mind. Then I was interviewed by several people in a conference room, only one of which ever spoke to me, and asked suspiciously about whether I knew various areas of programming, though no one ever asked an actual technical question. Then they told me that the job paid far less then they had advertised, but that "there might be some stock options at some point". On the good side, the whole experience galvanized me to move into more defensive stocks ahead of the market crash. Of course, the owner probably became a millionaire... Paul