Re: RM of [Organizational] Data

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 12:42:15 +0200, mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote:

>>>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?

A data model mathematical formalism for describing data structures and operations used to manage data. Who pays the bills is completely irrelevant.

>>>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.

I disagree with your summary.

1. There are custodians of data where custodians might mean many different things.
2. The owner the organization is the owner of the data (there are many problems here too)..

   ---

   The data model must take into account that the business owner is the owner of the database

This is like to say that a ballistic model must include parameters to take into account who is the owner the bullets.

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

I don't know if the term means the same everywhere (to publish unproductive private crazy thinkings) , but of course I don't want to contribute.

Regards Received on Sun Apr 17 2005 - 14:13:44 CEST