I now know of two global insurance companies who started their digital initiatives by trying to define a global, canonical data model, so I guess my two-year-old blog post is still relevant: innoq.com/en/blog/thoughts-o… TL;DR: You don’t want to do that.

Why You Should Avoid a Canonical Data Model

As an enterprise architect, you might be tempted to strive for a canonical data model for your systems’ interfaces. That’s not a good idea.

innoq.com

Nov 8, 2017 · 1:51 PM UTC

16
145
21
236
Replying to @stilkov @martinfowler
HL7? I think it's overkill, but extensibility made it go far. But what do you think?
1
I’m not an expert on HL7, but I do believe it has value. I’m not suggesting that standards are always bad – just weary of those that try to do too much at once
1
I only know UBL in more than a casual fashion, and I think it suffers from a lot of those problems
Replying to @stilkov
And where does that leave the Master Data Management Tools that Enterprises procure at insane prices expecting panacea? 😲
1
Hopefully on the trash heap of crap IT product categories, where they belong
1
Replying to @stilkov @martinfowler
In my opinion the conclusion is not so easy. Maybe large companies tend to be inwardly ill, so what you describe is more a phenomenon than the cause. And if so CDMs are not that bad in sane environments ;)
1
Sure, this is just my experience, and some commenters indeed claim to have had success. Many more agree, though, so I choose to remain skeptical
1
more replies
Replying to @stilkov
In case you've missed it, take a look at GS1. What a gem. You must use most if not all of 300+ classes to define one digital order. Behemoths aside, this is a huge mistake for e-commerce startups: gs1.org
4
Replying to @stilkov
So true, so sad
Replying to @stilkov
Ditto.... devcycle.co.uk/software-by-d…
Load more