I think you are misunderstanding my point here...

Yes, it would be narrow minded to think that practical work = lines of code. And, while I think concepts on their own are OK, they are are much better presented in the scope of practical work.

What is practical work? Could be a case study. How many case studies have you read where lines of code exist? I know of none. Case studies are a macro-level excersise. Code is a very micro-level entity.

So, with that in mind, you and I agree that you don't need code samples to get points accross. And, I think we agree that concepts are a great way of getting points accross. However, I happen to beleive that what we work in is very tangible. In other words, the things we build have presence, they do quantifiable things and have direct impact on the processes that rely on the existence of the applications we build. With that in mind, what is is that provides value? Bleeding edge theory that nobody can apply? Standard techniques that have been proven through the years? Or, somewhere in the middle. IMO, it is somewhere in the middle. Folks need new techniques, but they also need stuff than can be applied today. Now, who are the best folks to deliver that info? IMO, it is the folks that do real work. Tell me, who would you rather go listen to for a C/S session. Somebody who has actually worked with C/S backends and delivered applications, or somebody who has textbook knowledge of SQL and has heard about how SQL backends work? I will take the former thank-you. Of course, the person needs to be somebody engaging and dynamic, otherwise, you risk making the whole place fall asleep.

Case and point, Steve Black is great at presenting patterns. Why? Because he has employed the concepts in his Intl Toolkit. Doug Hennig knows more about the Data features of Fox than anybody. Why? Because he has developed several successful products that deal with just that. Rick Strahl is by far, one of the best presenters on interfacing VFP and web technology. Why? Because he again has developed several products and has developed large scale apps. Rod and I, we probably have one of the biggest VFP C/S in production today. Enough Said..

The point of all this is that any of use can read and talk theory. If however, you really want to teach, or if you are concerned with learning from somebody, to be truly effective, they NEED practical experience. This stuff is too complicated. There are too many discrepencies between the theorhetical aspects of how things are supposed to work and how they actually work. Often, the capacity for somebody being able to answer your question accurately is dependent on whether they actually use the technology. So, as far as you not caring about a presenter's practical experience, I think that is a bit short-sighted on your part. But hey, that is your opinion...

So in reality, I am very broad minded. I think that both concept and practical experience together makes for the best combination.

Remember Erik, our business is more like bricks and mortar...it is not astro-physics....regardless of how much folks would like to think what we do is the latter.....< s >....