|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private messages
Log in
|
|
| Author |
Message |
2tenPM Guest
|
Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:30 am Post subject: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
Hey there,
I plan on sitting the 70-300 in one months time. I have
little to no experience in using .NET technologies but am a
proficient programming in languages such as Java and C.
I have trying to decide which book to get to aid my learning.
I have looked in local book stores for the Exam Cram 2 book
as this is what most people seem to recommend.
No-one has it!
The closest I got was:
MCSD Analyzing Requirements and Defining .NET Solutions
Architectures Study Guide (Exam 70-300 (Certification Press)
by: Scott Duffy David Waddleton
Has anyone out there actually read this book?
Was it good?
Or, should I just wait for two weeks for the local book
stores to get the Exam Cram 2 book in ...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Saga Guest
|
Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:30 pm Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
I have the book in question (MacGraw-Hill/Osbonre) and am
reading it. So far so good, no complaints. The exam cram was
also recommended, so I plan on getting that too. I have always
made it a point to not depend on only one source of information.
Good luck!
Saga
"2tenPM" <twotenpm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:29ba01c4a76a$4b32f820$a601280a@phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hey there,
I plan on sitting the 70-300 in one months time. I have
little to no experience in using .NET technologies but am a
proficient programming in languages such as Java and C.
I have trying to decide which book to get to aid my learning.
I have looked in local book stores for the Exam Cram 2 book
as this is what most people seem to recommend.
No-one has it!
The closest I got was:
MCSD Analyzing Requirements and Defining .NET Solutions
Architectures Study Guide (Exam 70-300 (Certification Press)
by: Scott Duffy David Waddleton
Has anyone out there actually read this book?
Was it good?
Or, should I just wait for two weeks for the local book
stores to get the Exam Cram 2 book in ...? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Patrick Dickey--MSN Beta Guest
|
Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:31 pm Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
Why not get both books? First of all, if you wait until they get the book
in, you WILL cram for the test..Chances are, you may do awesome on it, but
won't remember sh*t from the information. And, what happens if the book
doesn't come in? Then, you either have to hold off on taking the test, or
buy this one anyhow. However, if you get the book now, and start reading
it, then get the Exam Cram book, you'll have a better chance of actually
'knowing' the material, instead of just spewing it out on a test.
Probably will do better on the test also;)
Patrick.
--
Smile... Someone out there cares deeply for you...
"2tenPM" <twotenpm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:29ba01c4a76a$4b32f820$a601280a@phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hey there,
I plan on sitting the 70-300 in one months time. I have
little to no experience in using .NET technologies but am a
proficient programming in languages such as Java and C.
I have trying to decide which book to get to aid my learning.
I have looked in local book stores for the Exam Cram 2 book
as this is what most people seem to recommend.
No-one has it!
The closest I got was:
MCSD Analyzing Requirements and Defining .NET Solutions
Architectures Study Guide (Exam 70-300 (Certification Press)
by: Scott Duffy David Waddleton
Has anyone out there actually read this book?
Was it good?
Or, should I just wait for two weeks for the local book
stores to get the Exam Cram 2 book in ...? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
UAError Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TomTom Guest
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:30 am Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
I had your suggestion and read the book and web sites written by Terry
Halpin on ORM. I took the test and I failed (and I am not blaming anyone).
In ORM, are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice versa?
In the book and web site, I didn't see those cases and I am confused.
"UAError" <null@null.null> wrote in message
news:uobrl0prhqpmc1j93sv5rt8rknh423t7p1@4ax.com...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
UAError Guest
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 4:32 pm Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
"TomTom" <no_spam@nospamfordiscussion.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I had your suggestion and read the book and web sites written by Terry
Halpin on ORM. I took the test and I failed (and I am not blaming anyone).
|
Well it wasn't necessarily your ORM that let you down. Even
if you get exactly 2/3 of the exam right you still do not
pass - and I doubt that ORM occupies 1/3 of the test's total
value. The premise of doing a task, even on a small scale in
20 - 40 min that you usually accomplish by talking to people
and by "incubating" the information can easily account for
the initial shock and the loss in score.
| Quote: | In ORM, are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice versa?
In the book and web site, I didn't see those cases and I am confused.
|
I'm not quite sure I quite understand your question. Object
a is usually connected to object b through a predicate aRb
with represents a single relationship between those two
objects.
However the concept of a "objectified
association"/"objectified predicate"/"nested object type"
exists.
If you refer to
Object Role Modeling, An Overview
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dv_vstechart/html/vstchvsea_ormoverview.asp
you can see one in "Figure 9. The final conceptual schema"
[Academic(empNr) teaching Subject(Code)] gets Rating(nr)+
The teaching predicate has become objectified. This
relationship could have just as easily be represented as a
ternary (if it wasn't for the fact that the objectified
association is independent, more on that later) - but in
this case the modeler has reasons to make the association
Academic(empNr) teaches Subject(Code)
strong enough to exist on its own - while objectification of
the predicate creates the opportunity to associate the
Rating directly with the (Academic teaching Subject).
When sitting on the fence of deciding between a ternary and
an objectified association Halpin gives the following
advice:
"Whenever the objectified predicate only plays one mandatory
role, the flattened version is preferred of the nested
version as it is more compact, natural and simplifies
constraint expression. In all other cases, the nested
version is preferred (e.g. choose nesting if the objectified
predicate plays an optional role, or plays more than one
role)."
If you look closely on the graphical representation of the
ORM schema you will see that each object is connected to a
role box within a predicate by the connecting line.
1. "Academic" is connected to the "...teaches..." role of
the "teaching" predicate.
2. "Subject" is connected to the "...is taught by..." role
box of the "teaching" predicate
3. "Rating" is connected to "...is obtained by..." role box
of the "gets" predicate.
4. "Teaching" objectifed association it connected to the
"...gets..." role box of the "gets" predicate.
However
5. "Academic" is NOT directly connected to the "Teaching"
objectifed association.
6. "Subject" is NOT directly connected to the "Teaching"
objectifed association.
Note that objective association "Teaching" has an
exclamation mark appended here because when functioning as
an object it is independent i.e.:
"An independent object type is a primitive object type whose
fact roles are collectively optional. Independent object
types have "!" "
In this case the "Rating" is optional making "Teaching"
independent mainly because a course is taught before its
instructor is rated.
In this particular case having "Teaching" independent its
mandatory "...gets..." role is treated the same the same as
if the role was optional - i.e. you HAVE to use an
objectified association and you cannot use a ternary
predicate.
| Quote: | Are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice versa?
Usually the phrase "an object is a child of object" |
automatically makes me think of the Composite pattern
http://www.dofactory.com/Patterns/PatternComposite.aspx
but we are talking ORM here, not patterns.
| Quote: | Are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice versa?
In UML the term "child" is sometimes (inaccurately) used in |
one of two situations
- part objects in a whole-part composition
- a subtype specializing a supertype (i.e. the derived class
in a inheritance relationship).
I don't think ORM pays any particular attention to
composition/aggregation.
And ORM isn't all that concerned about inheritance either -
however the notion of a subtype is helpful in this regard:
"Subtypes are introduced by finding an optional role (or
more) that is only played by some well-defined subtype; that
subtype is then realized and the role is transplanted to the
new subtype and made mandatory. Subtypes must be associated
with a definition that identifies the conditions on the
supertype that identify it as also belonging to the
subtype."
Again refer to "Figure 9. The final conceptual schema"
you can see three subtypes AND their associated rules:
each Teacher is an Academic who teaches some Subject
each Professor is an Academic who has rank 'P'.
each TeachingProf is both a Teacher and a Professor.
in effect the Academic, Teacher, Professor, and TeachingProf
form an inheritance hierarchy. Note that the subtype
connector DOES directly connect one object to another. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TomTom Guest
|
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 4:31 am Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
Thanks for your explanation. I think subtype was the parent-child
relationship.
By the way, Figure 9 seems to be nice in learning ORM. Thanks for letting me
know about the web site.
"UAError" <null@null.null> wrote in message
news:9hk2m0lj09j69ebi5860emb2v5t2huuc68@4ax.com...
| Quote: | "TomTom" <no_spam@nospamfordiscussion.com> wrote:
I had your suggestion and read the book and web sites written by Terry
Halpin on ORM. I took the test and I failed (and I am not blaming anyone).
Well it wasn't necessarily your ORM that let you down. Even
if you get exactly 2/3 of the exam right you still do not
pass - and I doubt that ORM occupies 1/3 of the test's total
value. The premise of doing a task, even on a small scale in
20 - 40 min that you usually accomplish by talking to people
and by "incubating" the information can easily account for
the initial shock and the loss in score.
In ORM, are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice
versa?
In the book and web site, I didn't see those cases and I am confused.
I'm not quite sure I quite understand your question. Object
a is usually connected to object b through a predicate aRb
with represents a single relationship between those two
objects.
However the concept of a "objectified
association"/"objectified predicate"/"nested object type"
exists.
If you refer to
Object Role Modeling, An Overview
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dv_vstechart/html/vstchvsea_ormoverview.asp
you can see one in "Figure 9. The final conceptual schema"
[Academic(empNr) teaching Subject(Code)] gets Rating(nr)+
The teaching predicate has become objectified. This
relationship could have just as easily be represented as a
ternary (if it wasn't for the fact that the objectified
association is independent, more on that later) - but in
this case the modeler has reasons to make the association
Academic(empNr) teaches Subject(Code)
strong enough to exist on its own - while objectification of
the predicate creates the opportunity to associate the
Rating directly with the (Academic teaching Subject).
When sitting on the fence of deciding between a ternary and
an objectified association Halpin gives the following
advice:
"Whenever the objectified predicate only plays one mandatory
role, the flattened version is preferred of the nested
version as it is more compact, natural and simplifies
constraint expression. In all other cases, the nested
version is preferred (e.g. choose nesting if the objectified
predicate plays an optional role, or plays more than one
role)."
If you look closely on the graphical representation of the
ORM schema you will see that each object is connected to a
role box within a predicate by the connecting line.
1. "Academic" is connected to the "...teaches..." role of
the "teaching" predicate.
2. "Subject" is connected to the "...is taught by..." role
box of the "teaching" predicate
3. "Rating" is connected to "...is obtained by..." role box
of the "gets" predicate.
4. "Teaching" objectifed association it connected to the
"...gets..." role box of the "gets" predicate.
However
5. "Academic" is NOT directly connected to the "Teaching"
objectifed association.
6. "Subject" is NOT directly connected to the "Teaching"
objectifed association.
Note that objective association "Teaching" has an
exclamation mark appended here because when functioning as
an object it is independent i.e.:
"An independent object type is a primitive object type whose
fact roles are collectively optional. Independent object
types have "!" "
In this case the "Rating" is optional making "Teaching"
independent mainly because a course is taught before its
instructor is rated.
In this particular case having "Teaching" independent its
mandatory "...gets..." role is treated the same the same as
if the role was optional - i.e. you HAVE to use an
objectified association and you cannot use a ternary
predicate.
Are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice versa?
Usually the phrase "an object is a child of object"
automatically makes me think of the Composite pattern
http://www.dofactory.com/Patterns/PatternComposite.aspx
but we are talking ORM here, not patterns.
Are there cases where an object is a child of object and vice versa?
In UML the term "child" is sometimes (inaccurately) used in
one of two situations
- part objects in a whole-part composition
- a subtype specializing a supertype (i.e. the derived class
in a inheritance relationship).
I don't think ORM pays any particular attention to
composition/aggregation.
And ORM isn't all that concerned about inheritance either -
however the notion of a subtype is helpful in this regard:
"Subtypes are introduced by finding an optional role (or
more) that is only played by some well-defined subtype; that
subtype is then realized and the role is transplanted to the
new subtype and made mandatory. Subtypes must be associated
with a definition that identifies the conditions on the
supertype that identify it as also belonging to the
subtype."
Again refer to "Figure 9. The final conceptual schema"
you can see three subtypes AND their associated rules:
each Teacher is an Academic who teaches some Subject
each Professor is an Academic who has rank 'P'.
each TeachingProf is both a Teacher and a Professor.
in effect the Academic, Teacher, Professor, and TeachingProf
form an inheritance hierarchy. Note that the subtype
connector DOES directly connect one object to another. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
UAError Guest
|
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 2:31 pm Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
"TomTom" <no_spam@nospamfordiscussion.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Thanks for your explanation. I think subtype was the parent-child
relationship.
By the way, Figure 9 seems to be nice in learning ORM. Thanks for letting me
know about the web site.
No Problem. |
Subtypes are part of Step 6 (of 7) of the Conceptual Shema
Design Procedure (CSDP): Add value, subset, equality,
exclusion and subtype constraints
and are discussed in Chapter 6 of
"Information Modeling and Relational Databases"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1558606726
on the ORM website see also:
Subtyping: conceptual and logical issues
http://www.orm.net/pdf/Subtype.pdf
Subtyping and Polymorphism in Object Role Modeling
http://www.orm.net/pdf/SubPoly.pdf |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TomTom Guest
|
Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2004 9:31 am Post subject: Re: Books for 70-300 |
|
|
Some more stuff to read. Thanks for introducing them.
"UAError" <null@null.null> wrote in message
news:dt65m0pkbsv25e1j31c88o7f60vltov53t@4ax.com...
| Quote: | "TomTom" <no_spam@nospamfordiscussion.com> wrote:
Thanks for your explanation. I think subtype was the parent-child
relationship.
By the way, Figure 9 seems to be nice in learning ORM. Thanks for letting
me
know about the web site.
No Problem.
Subtypes are part of Step 6 (of 7) of the Conceptual Shema
Design Procedure (CSDP): Add value, subset, equality,
exclusion and subtype constraints
and are discussed in Chapter 6 of
"Information Modeling and Relational Databases"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1558606726
on the ORM website see also:
Subtyping: conceptual and logical issues
http://www.orm.net/pdf/Subtype.pdf
Subtyping and Polymorphism in Object Role Modeling
http://www.orm.net/pdf/SubPoly.pdf |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|