Advertisement

Supporting Database Evolution: Using Ontologies Matching

  • Nadira Lammari
  • Jacky Akoka
  • Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2817)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a methodology for managing database evolutions by exploiting two ontologies. The first ontology describes the changes occurring in a database application. The second one aims at characterizing techniques and tools useful for database change management. We propose an algorithm performing ontologies matching and its application to identify appropriate techniques and tools for a given database change.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cremer, K., Marburger, A., Westfechtel, B.: Graph-Based Tools for Re-engineering. Journal of software maintenance and evolution: research and practice 14, 257–292 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lientz, B.P., Swanson, E.B.: Distributed Systems Development and Maintenance. In: Akoka, J. (ed.) Management of Distributed Data Processing, North-Holland, Publishing Company, Amsterdam (1982)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chapin, N., Hale, J., Khan, K., Ramil, J., Than, W.G.: Types of Software Evolution and Software Maintenance. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mens, T., Buckley, J., Zenger, M., Rashid, A.: Towards a Taxonomy of Software Evolution, USE03. In: 2nd International Workshop on Unanticipated Software Evolution, in conjunction with ETAPS 2003, Warsaw (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Felici, M.: Taxonomy of Evolution and Dependability, USE03. In: 2nd International Workshop on Unanticipated Software Evolution, in conjunction with ETAPS 2003, Warsaw (2003) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Comyn-Wattiau, I., Akoka, J., Lammari, N.: A Framework for Database Evolution Management, USE03. In: 2nd International Workshop on Unanticipated Software Evolution, in conjunction with ETAPS 2003, Warsaw (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davidson, S., Buneman, P., Kosky, A.: Semantics of Database Transformations. In: Libkin, L., Thalheim, B. (eds.) Semantics in Databases 1995. LNCS, vol. 1358, Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Batini, C., Lenzerini, M., Navathe, S.: A comparative Analysis of methodologies for Database Schema Integration. ACM Computing Survey Journal 18(4) (1986)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim, W., Choi, I., Gala, S., Scheeval, M.: On Resolving Schematic Heterogeneity in Multidatabase Systems. In: Modern Database Systems, ACM Press, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kashyap, V., Sheth, A.: Semantic and Schematic Similarities Between DataBase Objects: A context-based Approach. VLDB journal 5(4) (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller, R.J., Ioannidis, Y.E., Ramakrishan, R.: Schema Equivalence in heterogeneous Systems: Bridging Theory and Practice. Information System Journal 19(1) (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Biskup, J., Convent, B.: A formal View Integration Method. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Washington (1986)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadira Lammari
    • 1
  • Jacky Akoka
    • 2
  • Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratoire CEDRIC-CNAMParis
  2. 2.Laboratoire CEDRIC-CNAM et INT 
  3. 3.Laboratoire CEDRIC-CNAM et ESSEC 

Personalised recommendations