On May 5, 10:29 am, "jk" <aq...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(not the q's)> wrote:
> "Gosi" <gos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:70a0a40e-4e28-43df-8812-a5049abeab9c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 9:37 am, "jk" <aq...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(not the q's)> wrote:
> >> "AAsk" <AA2e...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
>>news:fdf9f76f-b1c0-4778-a2e4-accaef9dda34@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> > "One lone APLer could in many cases replace 10-20 applications
> >> > programmers..."
>
> >> > Another viewpoint on the same scenario is that "one lone APLer
> >> > introduces a single point of failure in the orgnisation" and no
> >> > organisation will chose to live with this kind of vulnerability.
> >> > Organisations exist to make a profit and the strongest influence on
> >> > profit is their expenses: can you seriously believe that they spend
> >> > 10-20 times more ( I am assuming that the APLer gets paid t he same
> >> > as
> >> > the orhers!) for the same end product?
>
> >> Solid teamwork is not a garanty for reliable systems. The reliable
> >> systems e.g. in the public sector can be counted on the fingers of
> >> one
> >> hand, and they have large teams with strict protocols for
> >> system-analysis and programming. I know of a system costing > 100mln
> >> euro's that is useless, or of 600.000 people receiving the wrong
> >> amount
> >> of allowance. Most such systems suffer not only from the "mythical
> >> man-month" but also from the fact that the real world has changed
> >> long
> >> before the projected system is in the air.
> >> On the other hand I know of really large APL-systems (e.g. an
> >> oil-refinery system, a student-financing system, large insurance- &
> >> pension systems, built by two or three people running smooth and
> >> stirdy
> >> (they should because big interest are at stake).
>
> >> In general for any system you'll need a small team (as small as
> >> possible) of really smart guys who know the ropes.
>
> > Maybe what we need is a certificate of qualification in APL?
>
> > The main idea for applying the certificate of professional
> > qualification is to get a official recognition of existing
> > competences, developed in the non-formal, informal and formal learning
> > and in work life.
>
> > Professional qualification means the level of competences (knowledge,
> > skills, experiences, values, personal characteristics), required in
> > the profession as an APL programmer or educator.
>
> > The application of professional qualification would be a process,
> > where a person attests the level of his or her professional competence
> > and a body, which awards professional qualification, *****ses the the
> > correspondence thereof to the professional qualification applied for
> > and issues a professional certificate.
>
> > Methods of attestation are interview, discussion, supervision,
> > ****tfolio, test assignment, attestation on the basis of do***ents.
>
> > Professional certificates shall be registered in a register which is
> > approved by ????
>
> We have that in Neth.: R.I. (Registered Informaticus), but only based on
> diploma's.
> I'd say, consider the APL-education as an academic study, from
> first-year through graduate, and consider succesful and recognized
> applications as a Phd.
Are you saying that you issue a cetricate "Qualified APL programmer"?
What would that be based on?
Are companies asking for such qualifications?
It should/would be advantageous if any such programmer can do the job
of 20 other kind of programmers.
I would think that if the APL programmer could work in a team with
others they would be better off than if they try to compete each other
out.
That is why I would like to see APL cooperate with the rest rather
than try to compete.
Integrate APl into the systems.
It is for obvious reasons not the same as "Qualified any other
programmer"
|
