|
Difference between
version 23
and
version 22:
| Line 54 was replaced by line 54 |
| - *** Note that semantic compatbility does not imply structural compatibility (the i/o types may not match) |
| + *** Note that semantic compatibility does not imply structural compatibility (the i/o types may not match; see below) |
| Lines 60-62 were replaced by lines 60-62 |
| - *** Given two components that are semantically compatible, determine one or more transformations (either by inserting new components or deriving a transformation step) to make them structurally compatible. |
| - *** Component integration is a search problem (and still researchy) |
| - *** May be a place where SCIA can contribute, to derive the structural transformation code and help users refine mappings |
| + *** Given two components that are semantically compatible, determine one or more transformations (either by inserting new components or deriving transformation "code") to make them structurally compatible. |
| + **** In general, component integration is a planning-style search problem (and still research) |
| + **** May be a place where SCIA can contribute, to derive the structural transformation code and help users refine mappings |
| Lines 65-67 were replaced by lines 65-68 |
| - *** Define a dataset of interest (as a query), find/combine datasets to populate result (classic data integration). |
| - **** Perhaps a place for SCIA to contribute? |
| - **** Still research |
| + *** Given two datasets, merge them (data fusion) into a single dataset based on their semantic annotations + metadata |
| + *** Define a dataset of interest (as a query (traditional) or as a target schema), find/combine datasets to populate result (classic data integration). |
| + **** Perhaps places for SCIA to contribute? |
| + **** In general, still research |
Back to Kepler Meeting SMS Notes,
or to the Page History.
|
