Metadata MappingPresentation By Vladimir Bukhin on Oct 8th
Contents•   Metadata interoperability goals.•   Definition of Metadata.•   Metadata Building Blocks.•   Heterogeneities wit...
MetadataInteroperability Goals•   Metadata interoperability:    •   Systems and applications can work with or use metadata...
What is Metadata• Metadata: •   “the sum total of what one can say     about any information object at any     level of ag...
Metadata Building Blocks           - Define Schemes, meta-meta-model,           UML, XML, SQL DLL.           - Defines how a...
Metadata Heterogeneities
Interoperability Solutions•   Agreement on a certain model:    •   Accredited institution like W3C or ISO.    •   Consensu...
Metadata Mapping      Maintaining    representations        Start   Find relationships and                                ...
Conclusion• Mapping suggested over Standards.   • Standards require licensing, software      tools, personnel costs.    • ...
Bibliography•   Haslhofer, Bernhard and Wolfgang Klas. 2010. A survey of techniques    for achieving metadata interoperabi...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Metadata mapping

935 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
935
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
24
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • \n
  • \n
  • Paper focuses on last 2 things.\n\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • To understand the problem, we must define the differences/heterogeneities between metadata.\nHeterogeneities that interfere with interoperability: \nStructural (model-related): \n element definition conflicts\n naming: models elements representing same element given different name\n Identification: If they have an id, having different one (sometimes no id, only name exists)\n Constraints: datatype for example.\n Domain Representation\n Abstraction level: domain representation conflicts, entities arranged into different generalization hierarchies, or distributed into different model elements\n Multidimensional correspondences: Conflict in the multiple relationships drawn up.\n Meta-level discrepancy: information with in different elements (like naming)\n Domain coverage: one model has data x, the other does not.\nSemantic: (language differences in schema)\n Domain conflicts: different expressiveness of languages\n Terminological: naming: synonyms and homonyms\n Scaling/Unit Conflicts: different measurement units\n Representation: format of date value for example\n\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Metadata mapping

    1. 1. Metadata MappingPresentation By Vladimir Bukhin on Oct 8th
    2. 2. Contents• Metadata interoperability goals.• Definition of Metadata.• Metadata Building Blocks.• Heterogeneities with metadata .• Interoperability Solutions.• Metadata Mapping.• Conclusion.
    3. 3. MetadataInteroperability Goals• Metadata interoperability: • Systems and applications can work with or use metadata across system boundaries.• Requirements: • Machines need to communicate to exchange metadata. • Machines must be able to read/process the data received. • Machines + humans must be able to interpret the metadata correctly.
    4. 4. What is Metadata• Metadata: • “the sum total of what one can say about any information object at any level of aggregation, in a machine understandable representation.”• Information Object: • “anything that can be addressed and manipulated by a human or a system as a discrete entity.”
    5. 5. Metadata Building Blocks - Define Schemes, meta-meta-model, UML, XML, SQL DLL. - Defines how attribute like ‘title’ will be semantically presented. - Element Definitions. - Content Rules. - Descriptive Metadata elements
    6. 6. Metadata Heterogeneities
    7. 7. Interoperability Solutions• Agreement on a certain model: • Accredited institution like W3C or ISO. • Consensus, Standard, or assurance of uniform implementation.• Agreement on meta-model: • Schema is defined by the same language (standard model with different implementations)• Reconciliation of structural and semantic heterogeneities: • Mapping schema languages to others’ language. • Instance transformation (changing meta attributes to correspond)
    8. 8. Metadata Mapping Maintaining representations Start Find relationships and heterogeneitiesMetadata transformation. Formal Declaration of Answer queries over mapping relationships metadata sources.
    9. 9. Conclusion• Mapping suggested over Standards. • Standards require licensing, software tools, personnel costs. • Mapping has high discovery cost.
    10. 10. Bibliography• Haslhofer, Bernhard and Wolfgang Klas. 2010. A survey of techniques for achieving metadata interoperability. ACM Comput. Surv. 42, 2, Article 7 (February 2010), 37 pages.

    ×