[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:16:14 -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
<len.bullard@intergraph.com> wrote:
> The problem is it isn't contract, but contracts.
> RFP by RFP. It is great if they can all reference
> one ontology, but for that to work, that ontology
> has to be the sum of their requirements;
I was going to say something similar, but from the enterprise
integration context: It's great if you can get an ontology that
describes the implicit semantics in a bunch of applications and
databases by relating them back to the actual business functions they
serve. BUT it is highly unlikely, in my experience anyway, that the
ontology will remain the master "contract". Instead, the apps and DBs
and business processes will evolve, as they always do, and IF &deity;
smiles on us the ontology will be kept in synch.
&deity; is, however, a capricious god :-) and seldom smiles on the
geeks trying to make life difficult for the people who are doing what
they have to do to make the numbers this quarter or whatever.
|
