The two articles Data Processing and Data processing bearing the same name (but an uppercase) and discussing similar but distinct subjects, they should be either merged, or renamed properly. Yes...it is destiny.

I support merging the two versions (with & without a capital "P" into one.

However, I take exception to the view that data processing transforms data into information.

Data can be defined as "Recorded, ordered symbols or signals that carry information and patterns that describe or define a concept or object."

Information can be defined as "Meaning and context arising from processing, interpreting, or translating data to extract an underlying message or pattern."

Although processing is one way to produce information, in the sense of standard report generation, it isn't the primary way. And even here, it's a strech because a human had to predetermine how to interpret data so that it would yield information. Information is generally considered a human construct - beyond the ken of machines. And procesing does many things that don't result in the generation of information, such as coding, cleaning, validation, organizing...

My message, for what it's worth, is that to state that the purpose of processing is to transform data into information is weak, at best, and bordering on incorrect. However, I chose not to rewrite the entire article based on one person's opinion. Albert Simard (talk) 20:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply