>I believe we are discussing the Chain of Responsibility pattern, where by an object passes messages up a certain chain until it is handled. Of course, the chain can be containership, object hierarcy, or some other also.
>
>Read all about it in your Patterns bible.

Patterns? Patterns bible? You've got me hunting for my glossary. If I'm likely to find my answers there you need not elucidate further.

"Patterns"? The world of high tech is gobbling up generic terms and narrowing their meaning at such a high rate I think I'm going to have to start a movement akin to the one that's trying to protect our old growth forests!... Preserve the generality of English for all peoples! Don't let the evil speakers of Nerdese userp our precious verbal resources! ;-) (TFIC) (Shoot! At least doctors had the common decency to invent their own jargon of pathological nonsense!)

(before my introduction to DB'ese I had a friend who absolutely could not understand why I would want to 'sort' a table in a certain situation...we could not communicate until I dropped my generic use of 'sort' for the less attractive 'index')

I don't think I like the 'pattern' I see developing...let's see?? would that be the "Late-20th-century-penchant-for-'Overloading'-English" Pattern?

Our attempts to analogize our high-tech models to everyday terms are...well...classic. Excuse me, I have to go fix a bug that I picked up from a virus that was lurking in that pile of trojan horseshit I just stepped in.

And of course I hope you realize that ever since you 'clicked' OK on that MS software agreement acknowledging that you merely bought access rights to use MS' 'property', the proper reference to same is MS.Windows (at this point I'd normally use an exclamation point but I wouldn't want you to think I was talking about a database

<

pre

>

!

<

/pre

>

)

(Sorry for the digression...somehow 'patterns' pushed my button this morning)