Press "Enter" to skip to content

Explaining the Fabric Ontology

James Serra takes us through a big word:

For years, most data conversations have started with tables. We ask where the data lives, what columns are available, how the joins work, and whether the data is in a warehouse, lakehouse, semantic model, or some other system. That makes sense, because tables are how most of us have worked with data for decades. But tables are not how the business thinks.

A business thinks in terms of customers, products, orders, shipments, assets, flights, runways, employees, policies, and actions. The problem is not usually a lack of data. The problem is a lack of shared meaning. Organizations often have the same business concept represented multiple ways across teams and systems, creating what I would call semantic drift. Sales may define a customer one way. Finance may define it another way. Operations may have yet another version in a different system with different keys, names, and assumptions. That is exactly where Fabric Ontology becomes important. It is designed to close the gap between physical data structures and business meaning.

Microsoft is a bit late to the ontology game and their current concept of an ontology shows. I can understand where they’re going but they still have a ways to go.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.