Re: On view updating

"mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message news:41553835$0$559$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...

> Delving into the nature of the jargonclashes:
> they are due to thinking that we are discussing
> the same things, when in fact we are not, or,
> the other way around: thinking we are discussing
> different things because we use different words
> to denote the same thing. These problems are not
> in how we perceive the subjectmatter, but just
> in our different labeling of it.

Your entire point is excellent, and very well stated.

But I want to point out the overlap between this aspect of the jargon problem, and a classic problem when multiple groups try to integrate their data: it's the synonym and homonym problem. Two groups use different codes to identify what are in fact the same thing. Or two groups use the same code to identify what are, in fact, two distinct entities, albeit closely related.

This happens over and over again. Reconciling these clashes is one of the most time consuming aspects of creating an integrated database, where several disjoint databases existed before. Received on Sat Sep 25 2004 - 13:56:13 CEST