Metadatabase modeling for enterprise information integration
An underpinning to the notion of computer-integrated enterprises is information integration; that is, the integration of information resources and decision logic across the enterprise to achiete functional synergies. This concept requires certain basic extensions to two previously separate paradigms: information modeling and metadata management. In particular, both paradigms mus consider not only data resources but also contextual knowledge in a unified way; furthermore, they have to converge as a single, integrated method rather than belonging to two distinct stages of a life cycle. Toward this end, a modeling system is developed based on the two-stage entity relationship (TSER) approach [3, 4, 5, 7] and the metadatabase method [5, 6, 8].
This paper presents the metadatabase goals and the metadata modeling system, focusing on its basic concepts, design, and current implementation. In addition, the prototype environmental of the metadatabase that this system creates is illustrated through some examples taken from a computer-integrated manufacturing case.
Key WordsMetadatabase data and knowledge management heterogeneous databases information modeling
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.A. Goldfine and P. Konig,A Technique Overview of the Information Resource Dictionary System (Second Edition, NBS Special Publication NBSIR 88-3700, National Bureau of Standrads, Gaithersburg, MD, January 1988.Google Scholar
- 3.C. Hsu, “Structural database system analysis and design through two-stage entity-relationship approach,”Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Entity-Relationship Approach, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 1985, pp. 56–63.Google Scholar
- 4.C. Hsu, A. Perry, M. Bouziane, and W. Cheung, “TSER: A data modeling system using the two-stage entity-relationship approach,”Proc. of the 6th Entity-Relationship Approach Conf., New York, pp. 461–478, 1987.Google Scholar
- 5.C. Hsu, and C. Skevington, “Integration of data and knowledge in manufacturing enterprises: A conceptual framework,”Manufacturing Sys., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 758–776, 1987.Google Scholar
- 6.C. Hsu, and L. Rattner, “Information modeling for computerized manufacturing,”IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern., vol 20, No. 4, pp. 758–776, 1990.Google Scholar
- 7.C. Hsu, M. Bouziane, W. Cheung, J. Nogues, L. Rattner, and L. Yee, “A metadata system for information modeling and integration,”Proc. Int. Conf. Syst. Integration, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, pp. 616–624, April 1990.Google Scholar
- 10.T. Landers and R. L. Rosenberg, “An overview of MULTIBASE,”Second Symp. on Distributed Database, North Holland, New York, pp. 311–336, 1982.Google Scholar
- 11.D. McLeod, “Interbase: An approach to controlled shring among autonomous, heterogeneous database systems,”Data Eng. Bull., pp. 3–7, Fall 1990.Google Scholar
- 12.S. Navathe, R. Elmasri, and J. Larson, “Integraging user views in database design,”Computer, IEEE Computer Society vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 50–62, 1986.Google Scholar
- 14.J.M. Smith, P.A. Bernstein, U. Dayal, N. Goodman, T. Landers, K.W.T. Lin, and E. Wong, “MULTIBASE—Integrating heterogeneous distributed data systems,” AAFIPS Proc., vol. 50, pp. 487–499, 1981.Google Scholar
- 15.U.S. Air Force,Integrated Information Support System (IISS) Report, Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing ICAM), Materials Laboratory, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, February 1983.Google Scholar
- 16.R. Wang and S. Madnick, “Facilitating connectivity in composite information systems,”ACM Data Base, vol. 20, no 3, pp. 38–46, Fall 1989.Google Scholar