Re: RM of [Organizational] Data

From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 12:42:15 +0200
Message-ID: <42623d8a$0$152$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>

Alfredo Novoa wrote:

> mountain man wrote:
> 

>>The issue of the ownership of data is possibly worth exploring.
>>Here we are restricting consideration to data held in a database.
>>
>>Using the following list of roles associated with any database
>>
>>>==================================
>>> DATABASE SYSTEMS ROLE-TYPES
>>>==================================
>>>
>>>--------------- Internal to the organisation:
>>>I01 - business owner(s)
>>>I02 - business executives and managers
>>>I03 - general organisation work-groups/end-users
>>>I04 - DBA (for SQL-DBMS)
>>>I05 - IT manager
>>>I06 - internal programmers
>>>I07 - specialised development teams
>>>I08 - Operations & help desk personnel
>>
>>>--------------- External to the organisation:
>>>E01 - contractors and consultants (in any roles defined above)
>>>E02 - contract programmers (or software house(s))
>>>E03 - consultants and suppliers (of selected RDBMS software)
>>>E04 - consultants and suppliers (of other software & hardware)
>>>E05 - business, management and financial consultants
>>>E06 - consultants in Models of Data
>>
>>
>>All other roles apart from I01 (buiness owner(s)) are what
>>might be termed custodians (of varying degrees) of the data,
>>whereas the actual ownership of the data resolves to the
>>owner of the organisation. Any diasagreements here?
>
> A fuzzy statement that leads nowhere.

What is your take on the ownership of data?

>>Consequently, implicit in any model of the data should be
>>the understanding that the data ultimately belongs to the
>>business owner.
>
> A blatant non sequitur.

Hmm... summary attempt (pls correct me)

1. There is ownership of data in various degrees.
2. Some role owns in the highest degree.
3. The subject matter is business data.
4. The business owner ulimately owns the data.

There may be some fallacy here, but I don't think it is non sequitur.

> It is just the contrary. A data model that is independent of all that
> arbitrary stuff would be a better data model. We have such data models
> so this is a complete waste of time.
> 
> 

>>Thus, implied in the phrase "RM of the data" is the
>>expanded form "RM of organisational data", because
>>data is always associated with an organisation (treating
>>an individual as a minimal organisation) without
>>exception.
>>
>>
>>Do you agree with this assessment?

> 
> 
> Do the readers of the group agree about this is mental masturbation?

Heh. It may turn out that way, but for now: No, I am curious where this takes us. Actually I think it is a pity that you feel this way, because it means you won't contribute - assuming you don't masturbate publicly :-) Received on Sun Apr 17 2005 - 12:42:15 CEST