Taken out of the middle of a current thread, sorry for the loss
of context.

>>Again, I could not agree more: but I guess the point I want to make
>>is that I want my users to have the greatest possible control over
>>the design of their system at the lowest possible price, and my
>>solution to that is to empower them with knowledge (the old "teach
>>'em to fish instead of giving them a fish" trick) so that they know
>>enough about what is possible from a computer system to be able to
>>demand what they want, not accept no for an answer, and even lend a
>>hand. Many years ago a Bell Labs supervisor said to me that when
>>they were looking for people to write readable computer
>>documentation, it was a lot easier to teach an English major about
>>computers than it was to teach computer programmers how to write; I
>>think that applies to the extremely complex tasks of analysis and
>>curation that only the sophisticated pattern-analysis capabilities
>>of a human brain can perform, and it's just relatively easy to teach
>>people who are already very good symbol-processors to do a little
>>more to take control of their tools. And all of us, I would guess,
>>are beginning to experience a decline in computer-illiteracy as
>>younger people enter the profession, which, together with more
>>versatile and user-friendly database systems, will eventually make
>>the whole discussion moot.
>>
>>Pat Galloway
>>MS Dept. of Archives and History

I find this entire thread pretty amazing.  Substitute brain surgery,
microwave oven repair or teaching disabled children to read for "do
a little more to take control of their tools" and I believe everyone
would think you foolish.  But because you can buy an "user-friendly"
database system there seems to follow the logic that no training or
prior knowledge is required to profitably use the technology.  Or
at best a little hand holding that can be learned in a week or
two of training.

Where is your evidence that curators (as symbol processors) somehow
naturally have the information modeling and algorithm implementation
background (either natively or through training) to build robust
long-lasting information management systems?  Are curators current
with the science and technology of database architectures?  Don't
we have jobs to do where we want the best technology for the job?
You don't build the microscopes you use to examine artifacts nor do
you tell your doctor how to remove your gall bladder.  How does
demanding control over your information systems design differ from
those unreasonable examples?  There are people trained to do such things,
to derive from intense examination of the process a functional
specification and design of the software you need and then to go out
and build it.  That's who I want building my systems.

My 2 cents,

Julian Humphries
Cornell University