Re: [ontolog-forum] master data vs. ontologies

[Thomas Johnston <tmj44p@xxxxxxx>]

Erick,

Master data, like all data managed in relational databases, is about instances of types. Rows in a Customer table, for example, are instances of the type Customer. Rows in an ICD10 table are instances of IC10 codes.

Ontologies are about the types themselves, not their instances. They are about, e.g. the type Customer being a subtype of the type Related Party. When the types are related in an IS-A hierarchy, that is a taxonomy which is part of an ontology. Other relationships among types flesh out the ontology, supplementing the taxonomy. For example, an agent/patient relationship might relate Vendor to Customer.

Ontologies are often graphically shown as a network of nodes and arcs -- boxes with lines between them. I think most ontologists would agree with me that this is just a matter of convenience, a graphic way to depict logical relationships among types. Technically speaking, the nodes and arcs represent objects and predicates in a second-order predicate logic.

So, in my opinion, while there is a great deal to say about master data, and about ontologies, resulting in a lot of potential for confusion, there is no more fundamental way to distinguish them than by saying that ontologies are to master data as types are to instances (also called "tokens").

And since relational databases do not manage types at all -- or, at best, only in a primitive way -- you can pretty much assume that commercial databases do not include ontologies at all.

Regards,

Tom Johnston

2/16/15

On Thursday, February 12, 2015 3:30 AM, Erick Antezana <erick.antezana@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I need some help to better define the line (sometimes apparently grey) between master data and ontologies.

We all, at least in this forum, know that there are several definitions for both terms. 

I guess most of us are familiar with Gruber's one: a formal specification of a shared conceptualization.

In the case of master data: 

- 'entities, relationships, and attributes that are critical for an enterprise and foundational to a key business process and application systems' 

or among others: 

- 'is the consistent and uniform set of identifiers and extended attributes that describes the core entities of an enterprise'.

What are the key components to differenciate master data and ontologies? 

What is common to both artefacts?

From what I have seen, sometimes the border between them seems indeed relatively grey... which seems to be the product of having ontologies as glue components of disparate master data. Also, there seems to be a continuum between them (as in the databases and knowledge base thread in this forum). Anyway, I would appraciate reading your thoughts about it.

Cheers,

Erick

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)