No, this is wrong, and the example of the database is the best example.

Very regrettably, RBDMS (traditionally) has not support for the complete relational model, neither the way to represent nested relations and for what we have as today with algebraic types.

Making impossible to TRULY model the domain. (plus other factors related to sql and such).

Is the same as old OOP languages that also were incapable of do the same.

The INHABILITY of TRULY model the domain is what is harmful. You need to impledance mismatch all the time, everywhere.

The second thing: What is the DOMAIN?

And here is where you are into something: The DOMAIN of the database and the DOMAIN of the transport protocols and the DOMAIN of the GUI, etc are DISTINCT domains!

Was VERY common in the past that the DBA (that actually understand RDBMS not like most current devs) know that he must model the DB in ways that support not only N apps (with different domains) and hopefully provide a abstraction for them (in terms of VIEWS and functions) but also for the operators.

The article point to this, but incorrectly say is a problem of trying to make the invalid unrepresentable, when, if you have doing DBs for decades, is the total opposite.

For example, being unable to eliminate the mistake of NULL is a headache with not end. Or try to use `1 0` as bools, or need to fill the table with a lot of NULLables columns because you can't represent a algebraic OR.