[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Primary and Foreign Keys
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: "Thomas B. Passin" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, xml-dev <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:08:22 -0500
Even if we can get the semantics sharable or just get them
all to agree that a boolean choice is not an int or is, we probably
built traps into our own relational table designs.
An issue is that many relational systems contain
a lot of system-specific metadata spread around throughout
the tables to data-drive the system itself.
Some bits are isolated into system tables, but
others are in the content tables. Think code systems for
picklists, user-extensible GUI features, etc. Now the
question becomes, if you want to create a true content-centric
schema minus the GUI stuff, how well will that be
rehydratible even roundtripping in and out of the same system?
Just sucking the marrow out of the relational bones mechanically
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Another interesting question is whether you have to provide a vocabulary or
ontology so that these other agencies' software can discover what you mean
by "driver", "SSN", or whatever, or whether the meaning of the terms can be
taken for granted. The first alternative is getting to be Semantic-Web-ish,
and sure would take a lot more doing.