Kingsley -On Sep 3, 2012, at 9:14 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: RDBMS is nice, but what about flat files, IDMS, IMS, M204, S2000, Adabase, etc, etc, etc., that are ALL in active use.
Likewise, most are accessible via one of the following: ODBC, JDBC, ADO.NET, OLE-DB, JDO, SOA Web Services, SOAP Services, RESTful interaction patterns e.g., via HTTP etc.. Once the data is accessible it becomes much more malleable etc..
I could be wrong here, but things like ODBC, JDBC, etc. are DATA access mechanisms, right?
They do not access the software that produces the data (to the best of my knowledge).
To repeat... I am asking if there is anything in the SW stack that helps deal with the (legacy) software. I am NOT, repeat NOT, interested in the data, since efforts like LinkedData appear to be handling that facet.
Let me try this..,. DATA is the finished product. I am interested in the machine tools (software) that produces the finished product.
What does "relational schema with base semantics" mean in your context? I think the tricky word here is "base."
I am referring to ontology generation from an RDBMS schema.
I interpret this as stating that a RDBMS schema is an ontology?
Or an ontology can be generated/extracted from a RDBMS schema?
Am I understanding this correctly?
Or is there a magic tool—it's a big world out there, I have no pretenses to know all magic tools—that automagically transforms a RDBMS schema into an ontology?
My overall question, of course, is if one has a 10-15-20+ year-old RDBMS schema that was designed & built long before "ontology" was applied to the systems world, how is it that said schema is an ontology or an ontology can be extracted/reverse engineered from a schema that looks more like a flat file?
After all, it takes very little work to move a 1700 data element flat file into a 1700 column single table RDBMS. It takes a LOT of work to move 1700 data elements into a well designed RDBMS.
|