Historical standards for data storage models: Which of the following was an approach to standardizing the storage and access of data in early database systems?

Introduction / Context:
Before relational databases dominated, industry groups developed specifications for data models and access methods. Recognizing these historical standards provides context for modern concepts like schemas, navigational access, and query languages.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• We compare general management or programming concepts with actual data model standards.
• We look for a formal specification aimed at database structure and access.
• We assume familiarity with legacy network-model DBMS history.

Concept / Approach:
CODASYL (Conference on Data Systems Languages) published the DBTG (Data Base Task Group) specifications defining the network database model—sets, owners, members, and navigational DML. These specs directly addressed the standardization of storing and accessing data. MIS (Management Information Systems) is a discipline, not a storage standard; structured programming is a software development paradigm, not a data storage specification.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Identify the option that is a formal data model standard: CODASYL.Eliminate unrelated domains (management discipline and coding methodology).Select the historically correct standard.

Verification / Alternative check:
Historical references list CODASYL/DBTG as predecessors to relational SQL, influencing early DBMS like IDMS and TOTAL that used network structures and navigational access paths.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• MIS: Organizational practice, not a storage standard.
• Structured programming: Program design technique; not a data storage/access standard.
• All of the above: Overinclusive.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming any well-known acronym applies to databases; only CODASYL specifically standardized data structures and access pathways in pre-relational systems.

Final Answer:
CODASYL specifications