13-07 2022 21:47
wrote:
I first met Victor when I was working for a company called Ascent Logic in 1996, and he was one of the people who used the systems engineering tool that we sold. He had built a very impressive executable model, and he provided valuable contributions to the user group support sessions that we ran.
After I left Ascent Logic in 1999 I lost touch with Victor – but our paths crossed again when he joined the Aircraft Carrier Alliance team in 2004. I had the privilege of working closely with Victor from then until I left the project in 2013. Victor was an excellent engineer, in many dimensions. His major tasks within the team were to configure the set of tools that we used to hold the engineering data for the Aircraft Carrier Mission System (DOORS, System Architect and several specialist tools), to maintain alignment of data mastered in one tool and copied and used in another, and to develop reporting tools to extract and analyse the data.
Related to this, and in many ways providing the foundation for the engineering repository, he maintained the ‘Presentational Data Schema’ – a kind of London Underground map of the data elements and the relationships between them. Like Harry Beck’s iconic map of the London Underground, in Victor’s hands the Presentational Data Schema was a thing of beauty. It conveyed very complex relationships in a clean and elegant way, cunningly laid out with the minimum of clutter and crossing lines.
As was inevitable, the Presentational Data Schema grew during the 9 years we worked together – and I remember the trepidation that I had every time I had to contact Victor to let him know of a proposed change (usually an addition) to his neat representation. His initial response was always the same: ‘Honey and fire ants’. As in – he would stake me out on an anthill and cover me with honey, and leave me to the fire ants for DARING to disrupt his perfect picture. Needless to say, on every occasion he would accommodate the change (addition) without destroying the aesthetic appeal of the Presentational Data Schema.
As an aside on the question of ‘Vic’ versus ‘Victor’: he made it very clear to those who paid attention that he was happy to be called ‘Vic’ in face-to-face discussions or on the phone. But for any written communication he insisted on ‘Victor’. Just a little quirk of his.
I liked and admired Victor hugely, and I am heartbroken that he is no longer with us.
With best wishes,
Paul Hicks
13-07 2022 21:47
wrote:
I first met Victor when I was working for a company called Ascent Logic in 1996, and he was one of the people who used the systems engineering tool that we sold. He had built a very impressive executable model, and he provided valuable contributions to the user group support sessions that we ran.
After I left Ascent Logic in 1999 I lost touch with Victor – but our paths crossed again when he joined the Aircraft Carrier Alliance team in 2004. I had the privilege of working closely with Victor from then until I left the project in 2013. Victor was an excellent engineer, in many dimensions. His major tasks within the team were to configure the set of tools that we used to hold the engineering data for the Aircraft Carrier Mission System (DOORS, System Architect and several specialist tools), to maintain alignment of data mastered in one tool and copied and used in another, and to develop reporting tools to extract and analyse the data.
Related to this, and in many ways providing the foundation for the engineering repository, he maintained the ‘Presentational Data Schema’ – a kind of London Underground map of the data elements and the relationships between them. Like Harry Beck’s iconic map of the London Underground, in Victor’s hands the Presentational Data Schema was a thing of beauty. It conveyed very complex relationships in a clean and elegant way, cunningly laid out with the minimum of clutter and crossing lines.
As was inevitable, the Presentational Data Schema grew during the 9 years we worked together – and I remember the trepidation that I had every time I had to contact Victor to let him know of a proposed change (usually an addition) to his neat representation. His initial response was always the same: ‘Honey and fire ants’. As in – he would stake me out on an anthill and cover me with honey, and leave me to the fire ants for DARING to disrupt his perfect picture. Needless to say, on every occasion he would accommodate the change (addition) without destroying the aesthetic appeal of the Presentational Data Schema.
As an aside on the question of ‘Vic’ versus ‘Victor’: he made it very clear to those who paid attention that he was happy to be called ‘Vic’ in face-to-face discussions or on the phone. But for any written communication he insisted on ‘Victor’. Just a little quirk of his.
I liked and admired Victor hugely, and I am heartbroken that he is no longer with us.
With best wishes,
Paul Hicks
