This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

20 Comments

  1. Tony Mary
    Posted February 27, 2009 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    heel goed stuk, klaar en duidelijk

    I like the passion, I see the purpose

  2. Posted May 21, 2009 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    Next time in the ICC Ghent, it’ll be for the F.A.C.T.S. convention in october!

  3. Posted June 8, 2009 at 10:06 pm | Permalink

    I vote culebra island as the next visit for a team building event !

  4. Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:00 pm | Permalink

    Yahoo is definitely a leader here, both in time and in approach: the power in the Web is within its users. Google has adopted well. Bing is a special beast: I like the way they have chosen for specialization in some areas.

  5. Posted July 22, 2009 at 9:42 pm | Permalink

    Concerning lesson #3, best to be careful, as some of these applications can reduce productivity. See http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/07/22/study-facebook-use-cuts-productivity-work?source=nlt_weekly .

  6. Johannes Peeters
    Posted July 27, 2009 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    Just found out that Best Buy is using GoodRelations to publish business information about all its stores!

    http://jay.beweep.com/index.php/2009/06/05/best-buy-local-stores-goes-semantic-with-good-relations-ontology/

  7. Posted July 30, 2009 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for setting up this fluent process.

  8. Herman Vereycken
    Posted August 9, 2009 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

    I think this is an interesting view on issues to be encountered while trying to reconcile cross-functional domain application services. However, from your article it was not very clear to me at first glance what the canonical information model or common/shared information model was all about.

    A quick Google search lead me to an interesting blog post about this common information model ( http://kjellsj.blogspot.com/2009/02/cim-common-information-model.html ) in which he explains the concepts of the common information model.

    In the blog post he also indicates that canonical schema’s are part of a standardized service contract and are generated from the CIM. By clicking through via the Canonical Schema pattern information, I ended up at an interesting PodCast with Thomas Erl about SOA design patterns.

    In the PodCast he states that, while collaboratively developing a CIM allowing cross-functional services interoperability, it is often the case that domain stewards can not come to an agreement to implement the CIM. This ofttimes means that they have touched the domain boundaries of service inventories, and thus allows the existence of multiple domain service inventories, each applying their own level of standardization.

    I’m hoping to find a clear answer in Part II on how Collibra will be able to practically break down these domain boundaries.

  9. Herman Vereycken
    Posted August 9, 2009 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    the PodCast on data-related SOA design patterns with Thomas Erl, highlighting Canonical Schema (e.g.) can be found here ( http://www.informit.com/podcasts/episode.aspx?e=0046c3e0-006d-4ab3-9494-6e461ad6189b )

  10. Posted August 9, 2009 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for the pointers on the canonical model. It is also described as an enterprise integration pattern on http://enterpriseintegrationpatterns.com/CanonicalDataModel.html

  11. Posted September 15, 2009 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

    Wouter, it seems that Google is catching up on events. See http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_adds_semantic_web_facebook_support_for_vide.php

  12. Posted September 15, 2009 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

    And of course, Bing is not lagging behind, but taking a different approach: http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/09/14/visual-search-why-type-when-you-can-see-it.aspx

  13. Posted January 9, 2010 at 11:22 pm | Permalink

    Note that the quoted text is attributed to M.J. Shields (in a letter to the Economist) according to http://www.ojohaven.com/fun/spelling.html .

  14. Posted February 17, 2010 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    Imagine employees of your organization making statements such as the following:

    “What emerged was startling: 26 signs, all drawn in the same style, appeared again and again at numerous sites (see illustration). Admittedly, some of the symbols are pretty basic, like straight lines, circles and triangles, but the fact that many of the more complex designs also appeared in several places hinted to von Petzinger and Nowell that they were meaningful – perhaps even the seeds of written communication.”

    From: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527481.200-the-writing-on-the-cave-wall.html?full=true

  15. Posted April 13, 2010 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    Somebody found, visited and reported on the island. Some nice pictures at http://ynnabalen.multiply.com/journal/item/219

  16. Posted May 6, 2010 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    well written blog. Im glad that I could find more info on this. thanks

  17. Posted May 14, 2010 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    You forgot one major thing: to explain what SBVR is. I understand that you write for a very specific audience, but just a brief explanation and a link to the spec would’ve been nice…

  18. Posted May 16, 2010 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    Hi Wim,

    SBVR is an abbreviation for Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Rules, and is one of the Object Management Group (OMG) standards. It is focused specifically at the level of business modeling for your organization’s (or even industry’s) business vocabulary and rules (e.g., next to a BPMN initiative focused at your business processes).

    As a standard, you should not consider it as an alternative to well known modeling notations (e.g., UML is one of the notations for SBVR modeling). Rather it is a conceptual framework of concepts that you have to deal with when you are working on a semantic layer (which is unavoidably a foundation for your data governance). Examples of such concepts: the business unit that owns or uses a certain term (= speech community), shared vocabularies across the entire organization (that you can incorporate), the distinction between a term and its meaning (i.e., “Client” and “Customer” as possible representations for the same concept, or synonyms), taxonomy, multiple rulesets applied on the same vocabulary, …

    The SBVR standard is the only thing out there that can really help you in dealing with the complexity of the problem. It recognizes the fact that different communities (e.g., business units, geographical divisions, lines of business, backoffice, frontoffice, …) do use different ways of describing things – although they might actually mean the same thing. Doing anything in a narrower scope that the SBVR metamodel advises you to do will at a certain point in time put you at a dead end…

    Concerning links, intro information can be found on the wikipedia page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBVR ), the full details are of course available in the specification itself ( http://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/1.0/ ) and I find that Mr. Hall’s presentation gives you something to help you understand SBVR ( http://www.omg.org/news/meetings/ThinkTank/past-events/2006/presentations/04-WS1-2_Hall.pdf ).

    Hope this helps.

  19. Posted May 17, 2010 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    Thank you Wim and Stijn for your comments. I have updated the document.

  20. Posted July 13, 2010 at 9:46 pm | Permalink

    Even more beautiful imagery of this island, brought in by Google alerts. See http://lakad-pilipinas.blogspot.com/2010/06/pangasinan-collibra-island.html

20 Trackbacks

  1. By Search with the Monkey on July 1, 2009 at 5:50 pm

    [...] applications. One of those is the GoodRelations ontology by Martin Hepp (discussed by Stijn in a previous blog post). Although the entire Semantic Web movement has goals that go far beyond this kind of [...]

  2. [...] One of those is the GoodRelations ontology by Martin Hepp (discussed by Stijn in a previous blog post). Although the entire Semantic Web movement has goals that go far beyond this kind of [...]

  3. By Things happen on July 4, 2009 at 6:24 pm

    [...] couple of weeks before we left for San Jose, Pieter went through the final step of his PhD: the actual defense. His jury was quite impressive: [...]

  4. By Collibra applied at SCA Packaging on August 31, 2009 at 8:49 pm

    [...] deliverables: i.e., the semantic pattern and the commitments as operational documentation, usable by both man and [...]

  5. By Collibra applied at SCA Packaging on September 1, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    [...] an innovative alternative to the complexity of managing canonical data formats; [...]

  6. By Bridging research information systems on September 3, 2009 at 8:41 pm

    [...] blog post is the third in a series of cases with semantics (for the first one, see “Delivering semantics“, the second one is at “Collibra applied at SCA Packaging“). For a more detailed [...]

  7. By Bridging research information systems on September 15, 2009 at 7:06 am

    [...] Collibra inside A view on enterprise software and semantics from the inside out .. Skip to content About « Collibra applied at SCA Packaging [...]

  8. By Collibra on the SOA Symposium on October 25, 2009 at 7:04 pm

    [...] this usually involve a sort of canonical data model, but this solution is limited (as shown in parts one and two on application [...]

  9. By Collibra at IRM’s DM&IQ and DW&BI conference on November 6, 2009 at 7:14 pm

    [...] Last Tuesday and Wednesday, Collibra presented its Business Semantics Management to a wider audience of very experienced data management, data governance and BI professionals. We got great feedback and a lot of enthusiastic reactions (ranging from ‘brilliant’ to ‘this is what companies should have been doing already 20 years ago’). Despite this clear response to a clear need, we did not find colleagues from the semantic technology space at the IRM’s DM&IQ and DW&BI conference (as was the case at the SOA Symposium). [...]

  10. [...] gave a presentation on Collibra business semantics at yesterday’s DAMA BeLux conference (see an earlier blog post for more details on the agenda). The title of that presentation was “Business Semantics: from [...]

  11. By ebizq - StartTags.com on January 25, 2010 at 9:44 pm

    [...] to exchange information on business integration technologies, problems, and solutions. We are …Three reasons why you need data governanceDavid Linthicum recently posted a brief article at ebizQ on Data Governance: Three Reasons why you [...]

  12. By Belgium’s Kruispuntbank & Okkam on January 31, 2010 at 12:32 pm

    [...] Economy and Science (one of Collibra’s customers for business semantics, e.g., see here) is actively looking into Okkam as a technology to help them realize their identifier issues. [...]

  13. By oracle fusion middleware - StartTags.com on February 6, 2010 at 7:15 am

    [...] Oracle showed us a lot of new features of the coming Fusion Middleware 11g Patch Set 1 (PS1) …Collibra at Oracle Fusion Middleware 11g ForumOn October 27th, Oracle showcased its Fusion Middleware 11g in Dolce La Hulpe (agenda details). [...]

  14. By maturity levels - StartTags.com on February 6, 2010 at 12:04 pm

    [...] organizational objectives on. … Capability and maturity levels (and the continuous and staged …Assessing organizational readiness … and beyondIts five levels are pictured below. Information Maturity Model. All it takes for an organization is [...]

  15. By research overview on March 29, 2010 at 6:25 am

    [...] accessible source of information for both scientists and clinicians, keeping them up-to-date …Overview of CERIFToday Pieter and myself got a nutshell overview of the Common European Research Information Format [...]

  16. By dr ir on March 29, 2010 at 10:31 am

    [...] 1) Prof. Dr. Ravik Karsidi, MS (UNS); 2) Prof. Dr. Furqon Hidayatullah, M.Pd (UNS); 3) Dr. Ir. …Collibra on Business EngineeringLast Thursday Pieter and myself visited the first conference of the Business Engineering Community. [...]

  17. By commutative diagram on April 6, 2010 at 11:39 pm

    [...] pronounciation … Having proofs done with commutative diagrams is so elegant and simple. …Magritte Flirting with Semantics…or to be more precise Rene Magritte flirting with semiotics. I spent my lazy Sunday (according to [...]

  18. By view from the inside on April 7, 2010 at 12:13 am

    [...] your fears, and the things you think you need to do to realize your goals and avoid your fears. …AboutWelcome to Collibra Inside! Collibra is a recent VC-backed semantic technology start-up [...]

  19. By Taxonomies or reference data? on February 21, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    [...] Collibra inside A view on enterprise software and semantics from the inside out .. Skip to content About « Reference data by example [...]

  20. By Algorithms | Bart Paeleman on December 19, 2012 at 8:12 pm

    [...] M. (2007) Syntax & Semantics [Online]. Available from http://inside.collibra.com/?p=268 [Accessed: 13 October [...]