A Model Theory for Generic Schema Management
- 424 Downloads
The core of a model theory for generic schema management is developed. This theory has two distinctive features: it applies to a variety of categories of schemas, and it applies to transformations of both the schema structure and its integrity constraints. A subtle problem of schema integration is considered in its general form, not bound to any particular category of schemas. The proposed solution, as well as the overall theory, is based entirely on schema morphisms that carry both structural and semantic properties. Duality results that apply to the schema and the data levels are established. These results lead to the main contribution of this paper: a formal schema and data management framework for generic schema management. Implications of this theory are established that apply to integrity problems in schema integration. The theory is illustrated by a particular category of schemas with object-oriented features along with typical database integrity constraints.
KeywordsModel Theory Schema Integration Schema Signature Integrity Constraint Database Schema
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Alagić, S.: Constrained matching is type safe, Proc. of the Sixth Int. Workshop on Database Programming Languages, LNCS 1369, Springer-Verlag, pp. 78–96, 1998.Google Scholar
- 4.Bernstein, P. A., A. Halevy, R. A. Pottinger: A vision for management of complex models, A CM SIGMOD Record 29(4), pp. 54–63, 2000.Google Scholar
- 5.Bernstein, P.A. and E. Rahm: Data warehouse scenarios for model management, ER 2000, LNCS 1920, Springer-Verlag, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
- 7.P. Buneman, S. Davidson, W. Fan, C. Hara, W-C. Tan, Reasoning about keys for XML, DBPL 2001 (Databases and Programming Languages), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (this volume).Google Scholar
- 8.Buneman, P., S. Davidson, and A. Kosky: Theoretical aspects of schema merging, EDBT 1992, pp. 152–167.Google Scholar
- 10.Fan, W. and L. Libkin, On XML integrity constraints in the presence of DTDs, PODS 2001, pp. 114–125.Google Scholar
- 12.Goguen, J.: Types as theories, in: G. M. Reed, A. W. Roscoe and R. F. Wachter, Topology and Category Theory in Computer Science, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 357–390, 1991.Google Scholar
- 16.Hull, R.: Managing semantic heterogeneity in databases: A theoretical perspective, PODS 1997, 51–61.Google Scholar
- 17.Kalinichenko, L.A.: Methods and tools for equivalent data model mapping construction, EDBT 1990, LNCS 416, Springer-Verlag, pp. 92–119.Google Scholar
- 18.Liskov, B. and J. M. Wing: A behavioral notion of subtyping, ACM TOPLAS 16, pp. 1811–1841.Google Scholar
- 19.Mac Lane, S.: Categories for a Working Mathematician, Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
- 20.Madhavan, J., P. A. Bernstein, E. Rahm: Generic schema matching with Cupid, VLDB 2001, pp. 49–58.Google Scholar
- 24.Spaccapietra, S. and C. Parent: View integration: A step forward in solving structural conflicts, IEEE TKDE 6(2), pp. 258–274, 1994.Google Scholar
- 25.W3C: XML Schema, http://www.w3c.org/XML/schema, 2001.