Identity

Comments

Comments are closed.

Although the talk presents some sensible concepts, it does so at a very slow pace which made me lose interest relatively quickly. The concepts are pretty basic and easy to grasp but are reiterated multiple times.

This is potentiated by having practically only one slide with little decoration.

The speaker has a good grasp of English and is easy to understand.

This may have worked better as a shorter talk.

There was not enough differentiation made in this talk between Value object and Identity and a lot of time was spent on Value objects so I'm not sure if Identity is a best talk description. It also felt like slides were unprepared and do not help much in explaining the topic.

The idea of wrapping every primitive with a value object is powerful. Mathias was confident, so the idea was even better communicated to the audience.

This talk was a very good follow-up for a previously held workshop which I attended and it was a nice sequel in my opinion. I liked the step-by-step practical example of how DDD concepts/building blocks can be applied in case of developing information systems for schools.

I guess that this talk was undetermined for all the folks who weren't at the workshop.

The concept itself that Mathias talked about is definitely an important one although I heard the most of it on the workshop. Therefore I must admit that the talk itself was not very interesting to me.

Although the example was clear, I think that it's hard to keep everyone's intention with one slide, maybe it's better to somehow base your talk around more slides which would keep the audience on their toes.

I think that Mathias could have use different terms for the things he was talking about. My proposal:

Identifier - a piece of data identifying an entity (like id, hash, or something else)
Identity - data basic description of an entity (like name, email, gender, etc)

The presentation was rather slow, although the topic is interesting in general.

Mathias is a very good speaker, but not even him could pull off doing an entire talk based on a single, relatively simple example, and a single slide. The topic itself is interesting enough, but quickly diverged into a very related, but not entirely identical concept of Value Objects. I think it could have benefited from a bit broader topic to reduce fatigue, and a couple of attention getters.

I'll quote another commenter, because I agree with him 100%:

"Although the talk presents some sensible concepts, it does so at a very slow pace which made me lose interest relatively quickly. The concepts are pretty basic and easy to grasp but are reiterated multiple times.

This is potentiated by having practically only one slide with little decoration.

The speaker has a good grasp of English and is easy to understand.

This may have worked better as a shorter talk."

Rated 5

Anonymous at 23:31 on 31 May 2015

Rated 5

Anonymous at 09:14 on 1 Jun 2015

The time slot for this talk was too long, I have a feeling everything was said in the first 10-15 minutes. It was a bit difficult to pay attention and follow along after that.

There is no reason to repeat one conclusion over and over. Speaker could tell this story in a shorter way with more points in his story.

Topic is great and I am sorry that lot of audience did not learn from this talk. More sliders would be better, and will be easier to keep audience attention. Lot of people leave this talk on a half.

Do not repeat yourself, more slides, point out most important sentences so people can memorize it and apply on Monday when they get to work.

This speaker knows a lot about DDD and architecture. More slides, few lines of code could make his speak much better.

Maybe the title is not the most accurate for this talk, but I derived some real value from it.

Rated 4

Anonymous at 10:28 on 10 Jun 2015