Having a language that already educated and skilled group of people can pick up fast is advantage. Targeting and working with people who grasp logic is good. Not bad. There's ever-repeating notion present that we need to invent tools that people, who are far from skilled, should be able to use to produce high quality results. Having a tool like SQL that's perfectly usable for a group of highly skilled people is excellent, not bad.
> None of the people who "speak SQL" these days fit that bill.
You can't prove this. This is what you believe is true.
> And FWIW, what I wrote was in reply to "mental model". It was you who apparently equated that with "speaking English"
Isn't it odd how we have the gift of being able to communicate, yet all we do is think we can wield telepathy and not use words to express ourselves. Unless you accurately express what it is you're thinking about, I can't fill in the gaps since I'm not telepathically enabled.
> Being English-speaking or not has nothing to do with understanding a particular logic underpinning the behaviour of a particular Data Manipulation Language.
> None of the people who "speak SQL" these days fit that bill.
You can't prove this. This is what you believe is true.
> And FWIW, what I wrote was in reply to "mental model". It was you who apparently equated that with "speaking English"
Isn't it odd how we have the gift of being able to communicate, yet all we do is think we can wield telepathy and not use words to express ourselves. Unless you accurately express what it is you're thinking about, I can't fill in the gaps since I'm not telepathically enabled.
> Being English-speaking or not has nothing to do with understanding a particular logic underpinning the behaviour of a particular Data Manipulation Language.
Of course it does.