Based on this criterion and after extensive evaluation, it has become clear that Paradox does not generate sufficient revenues to warrant further investments in development at this time. On an ongoing basis, Corel examines its business lines to ensure they are profitable. I heard that Paradox wasn't being developed anymore. This was done in the event that a user needed to run both Paradox 10 and the Paradox version that shipped with version 11.
The only change made to Paradox was the versioning (a Splash Screen and the About Box) to update the build to 233. When a Service Pack is released, the splash screen will be updated. The Paradox splash screen stating version 11, was an error. Why does the Paradox splash screen state "11" if there are no changes to Paradox? Please read the information below to clarify some of these concerns: There has Recently been several questions regarding the WordPerfect Suite 11 and Paradox that is included with the suite. The recording system for reptiles and amphibians was constructed following these two models with assistance from Phil Piper (Piper forthcoming).The following message was posted to the Corel newsgroups (I would link to it, but Google is not yet mirroring the WPO11 newsgroups):
James Barrett's ( 2000) unpublished recording system, Fish 1.1, was adopted for fish (see Barrett 1995 Barrett and Oltmann 1997 for early versions). The original EAU recording protocol was retained (with minor modifications) for mammals and birds (Dobney et al. In 2000, we therefore decided to redesign the system from scratch using Microsoft Access as a platform. Moreover, fish, reptiles and amphibians were not fully integrated into the recording system and, overall, it entailed numerous complexities inherent in its origin as an organic product developed over many years.
It occasionally reset its auto numbering system, used for specimen identification numbers, causing records to be over-written. There were further 'glitches' in the database. However, data could not be viewed in the database without inadvertently creating new records, and graphical interfaces were not used for variables such as element portion (see diagnostic zones) and tooth wear. The interface was simple but functional (see Figure 2 below, in contrast to Figure 1, the current recording interface). Most tables contained redundant data, and the database had not been normalised (the streamlining process in which redundant and duplicated data is removed and the database is made more efficient).
Earlier EAU databases that have contributed to the recording system now in use include Hardy ( 1982), which featured an early Apple micro-computer system and a pair of directly wired analogue callipers, and a simple but effective fish recording system (Wheeler and Jones 1989, 135).īasic tables in the Paradox database included principal data, butchery, measurements (one table per major element), pathologies, preservation, teeth, weight and 'unidentified' specimens, as well as several lookup tables used to reference full data relating to species, element, pathology, butchery, preservation, etc.
This Paradox database was based upon an early version implemented using a Mac HyperCard stack and powered by an Oracle database, which could handle some features, such as a graphical representation of diagnostic zones, much better than the later Paradox version. It was designed using Corel's Paradox 7 database management system. The York System is based on a relational database used at the EAU, following the EAU's animal bone recording protocol (Dobney et al. Background: The Original Environmental Archaeology Unit Database