Re: It don't mean a thing ...

"mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message news:40bc8896$0$36861$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
> x wrote:
> >> Well, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data ,
> >> under meaning of data and information,
> >> say "data on its own has no meaning".
>
> <quote>
> Data on its own has no meaning, only
> when interpreted by some kind of data
> processing system does it take on
> meaning and become information.
> </quote>
>
> Googling for this statement showed me
> that some serious copy & pasting of it
> has been going on. Does it have a source?
> Do you (posters - and lurkers - of c.d.theory)
> subscribe to this point of view?
> Is it bad?
>
> Please share your opinion.

The word "meaning" is critical here. Meaning to whom? I'd probably guess that this meaning is with respect to the organization which has assembled the data, the systems, the users, etc. So using this ...

IMO the statement is accurate, but should be generalised further: data on its own not only has no meaning but is absolutely useless without the corresponding application layer by which it is constantly maintained.

The organization requires both the data and the application layer in order to function. They are the ying and the yang; inseparable.

Pete Brown
Falls Creek
Oz Received on Tue Jun 01 2004 - 18:28:28 CEST