Mike Tung

Thanks for sharing the military example Mike G..  I think it’s a great example of how knowledge sharing in a real-world environment is more complex. I think in any community there are folks that are ok with the status quo framing and those that do not. If it wasn't clear Im in the non- status quo camp 🙂 I think things like the Deloitte whitepaper (not to pick on Deloitte but nearly every paper where the topic is knowledge graphs seems to use) are hype that I am calling out - its not bad intent (their intent is to sell consulting services), but bad information. Framing like that leads to expensive, failed projects, which aren't a good thing for the KG community. I'm offering an alternative way to think about when a practitioner might use KG tech that's more practical than the "your org should build a KG" advice, which I don’t think anyone here really believes. I'm still skeptical "data mesh" is the answer. Are we saying schema.org is an example of data mesh architecture? To me schema.org is a way for you to communicate with Google (nominally other major search engines) using structured data, not so different from the Stripe API. It is not a web-wide interlingua that is used between two non-Google entities.

Yeah I think the tools matter a lot. They can save a lot of data integration issues at the point of entry. How we get more CRMs to be schema-aware is a good question. I think the KG community has something to offer as we've been thinking about ontology design for a long time, and so they don't reinvent the wheel.

schema.org is a way for you to annotate your content for Google

Yes i think schema.org is a good example of adopting some structured data incrementally into the workflow (i.e. the Wordpress/CMS workflow). It's not an internet-wide data interchange format though--rather it works because its controlled effectively by the search engines and people conform to it because they want to get ranked in the search results.

Ideally, yes. In reality, look at any company's CRM. Even within a team of people that has the same goal (sales), they struggle to define common definitions, and more importantly, enforcing them. So I think we have to be realistic, from the perspective of the one dealing with the data, they have to consider it a net productivity gain, otherwise it's just bureaucracy.

hey Juan S.! i listened to this on the way into work. Sounds like a Data Mesh is a model where each domain-specific team is responsible for serving their own data (distributed serving), but there is a centralized agreement on vocabulary/standards.? Kind of like the web? I think the tough pill to swallow is this centralized definitions/standards committee.

They sent me a cold email last year. Seems like a crypto startup that is doing a data crowdsourcing marketplace, so I didnt really investigate further. Cool video, tho

Its stuff like this whitepaper that prompted me to write the essay. I think its bordering on malinformation that doesn't help anyone over the long-term: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/de/Documents/operations/knowledge-graphs-pov.pdf

Cool, I haven't heard the term Data Mesh being used and will read this. I guess my main point there is that different teams in a company are already federated and they don't need a company-wide data architecture, which sets us up for the trough of disillusionment. If we study what information actually needs to be shared across teams, KG tech can be used here to streamline that by making sure those high-throughput information flows are structured data. we can also have impact much faster, as measured by actual productivity.