J
Jon Davis
I have a couple questions. First of all, would anyone consider a
multi-layered programming approach (building business objects that are
seperate from data access logic and seperate from user interface logic but
that interface the UI and the data) an n-tier implementation by definition?
Or does n-tier necessitate a network-distributed architecture (beyond IIS
and SQL Server, i.e. COM+/MTS/MSMQ/WCF) in addition to the layered
programming? If a solution is properly broken up into its distinct layers,
does this qualify as 'n-tier'?
Additionally and more broadly, ...
- "n-tier"
- "3-tier"
- "distributed architecture"
- "multi-layered programming (UIL, BLL, DAL)"
I'm finding a lot of confusion among managers and software engineers
throwing these terms around interchangeably. I have my own opinion about
these--how they relate and how they are distinct--but I was wondering what
the opinions are of others in this newsgroup community. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Jon
multi-layered programming approach (building business objects that are
seperate from data access logic and seperate from user interface logic but
that interface the UI and the data) an n-tier implementation by definition?
Or does n-tier necessitate a network-distributed architecture (beyond IIS
and SQL Server, i.e. COM+/MTS/MSMQ/WCF) in addition to the layered
programming? If a solution is properly broken up into its distinct layers,
does this qualify as 'n-tier'?
Additionally and more broadly, ...
- "n-tier"
- "3-tier"
- "distributed architecture"
- "multi-layered programming (UIL, BLL, DAL)"
I'm finding a lot of confusion among managers and software engineers
throwing these terms around interchangeably. I have my own opinion about
these--how they relate and how they are distinct--but I was wondering what
the opinions are of others in this newsgroup community. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Jon