Developing Thoughts

[dmontano]

I have really been thinking about how to develop "any" given system - all tables in 1 file; multi-files with 1 table in each; multifiles with multitables; interface file with separate data file(s); etc. The ramifications of me understanding the different aspects or thoughts about it will go a long way in helping me make a choice for myself.

Imagine a pretty large "System" (say, 500 tables) that is comprised of "Subsystems", that are comprised of "Modules", that are comprised of "Components".

A Component is 1 Table;

A Module more than 1 Component;

A Subsystem more than 1 Module;

A System is more than 1 Subsystem.

COMPONENT examples:

People Component (1 File; 1 Table)

Address Component (1 File; 1 Table)

Roles Component (1 File; 1 Table)

MODULE example:

Contacts Module (People Component; Address Component; Roles Component)

These Components would be either:

A. Linked via file references; OR

B. Imported into the "Module" upon initial development of the "Module". If another "Component" was needed later, import or link the "Component" or "Components"

SUBSYSTEM example:

Sales Subsystem (Contacts Module; Quoting Module)

These Modules would be either:

A. Linked via file references; OR

B. Imported into the "Subsystem" upon initial development of the "Subsystem". If another "Module" or "Component" was needed later, import or link the "Module" or the "Module's Component(s)"

SYSTEM example:

ABC Company System (Sales Subsystem; Accounting Subsystem)

These Subsystems would be either:

A. Linked via file references; OR

B. Imported into the "System" upon initial development of the "System". If another "Subsystem" or "Module" or "Component" was needed later, import or link the "Subsystem" or the "Module(s)" or the "Component(s)".

I really think there is a way to be more linear, deliberate, exacting in developing solutions than what I am doing now; what I have read in "general"; and many topics I have found myself listening to. I know FileMaker can do all sorts of things in all sorts of ways. However, I know there are better ways than others. What I do now is better than what I did 6 months ago, but I keep unraveling this onion to discover new layers I wish I had been exposed to or thought of before doing "this" instead of "that".

A typical answer to this post may be "Depends on the Solution". And that is what I am trying to separate myself from. I suspect that the "solution specific issues" or customization can come afterwards via Interface. It is the core structure elements that I believe could actually be very rigid. Which means consistent, predicable, etc. A custom house has many standard items, components, which in part make for a "quality" custom home. Standards support customization and make them more possible in a fixed amount of time.

The whole premise is I dislike working in a state of disconnect. For example, write a script that does this function. Then a few weeks go by and "which" file was in used in? How can I update all instances of that script? I know, keep it all in one file. But think beyond the "one" solution. What about the "two or three or dozen that are out there.

Take the same concept about tables and what you may have defined as attributes and how they seem to change over time: a new attribute arrives on scene, a revised calculation that fixes, improves, or extends what it use to do before. I could go on and on - I hope I am getting my thoughts across.

I am not "complaining" either. I find FileMaker addicting. I find "developing" addicting. I am very interested in developing in a fashion where I can set a standard AND update other files, tables, scripts, solutions in a methodical, efficient, manner. But the bigger interest is in the initial development.

A custom home needs 28 doors, 48 double-pane windows, 3000 sq. feet of travertine tile, etc. How well they are fastened and installed is the result of the craftsman, how the home looks, feels, and functions is the result of the designer / architect, and how well it stands the tests of time and not collapse is the result of the architect / engineer.

This is not "rant" - rather a solicitation of ideas.