Talk:Metadata registry

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Open (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OpenWikipedia:WikiProject OpenTemplate:WikiProject OpenOpen articles

Ummmm... you're presenting the CONCEPT of metadata registries as if they exist & are in active use. In the 1970s & 1980s the industry term for this sort of work would have been under the umbrella of "data dictionary." With IBM's late 1980s AD/Cycle effort, "data dictionary" morphed to "metadata repository."

While many organizations have made concerted efforts to implement the dream of an "enterprise data dictionary/metadata repository" exceedingly few have succeeded.

So I think it a tad misleading to discuss "metadata registry" as if it were real (meaning in actual used by systems analysts, developers & operations). DEddy 03:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree with the above, from what I have observed. Propose this context be added to the page (I'll probably do it next time I'm by).

--Metajohng 18:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I am confused. Why is there a international standard if it weren't real? There is a big vendor base for meta data repository. - Shazzad 02-21-07

Having standard(s) and having something actually used are not necessairly closely related.

Where is the "big vendor base"? More appropriately, where are metadata repositories—large and small—in active, daily use by CUSTOMERS? In practice spreadsheets are probably the most widely used "repositories." DEddy 17:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Of course there are people paying for and using metadata registries. One of the market leading products is ASG's (now IBM's) Rochade product.

As of Thursday, March 8, 2007 I have not heard that IBM has purchased ASG's Rochade repository product. A presentation by Peter Aiken at the DAMA International/Wilshire Metadata conference offers that CA's repositories have 9% marketshare with ASG/Rochade at 7% share. The leader (at 45%) is "no repository." DEddy 20:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Metadata registry is really a misnomer. If you have a business registry, the model will contain a business object class. Is there a model out there with an object class called metadata? Hardly, so there is no such a thing as a metadata registry. In fact, they are more correctly described as data registries, or some semantic representation of data, such as a data element. The use of the term metadata in this way actually confuses the issues, and conceals what is really variations of data registries. A real metadata registry, is a registry that can express all the metadata of all the systems in all the world! Another aspect of this is simply that metadata is stored in a separate sub system, and this is just an architectural solution. SAS, for example, has this architecture, but is really an application for production of statistics, not a registry in the more narrow sense of documentation. This distinction is also blurred with this vague and generalised use of a term like metadata registry. What SAS has is really a metadata server, not a repository or registry, in the narrow sense. [[[Special:Contributions/79.136.76.102|79.136.76.102]] (talk) 11:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)]Reply

External links modified (January 2018) edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Metadata registry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:15, 26 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic