Talk:Metadata registry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ummmm... you're presenting the CONCEPT of metadara 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)

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)

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)

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)