Scope
Compared
- How each represents entities, relationships and identity
- How each treats provenance and evidence
- What each is fundamentally for
Not compared
- Specific serializations (RDF, property graphs) or query languages (SPARQL, Cypher)
- Storage engines or performance characteristics
- Vendor implementations
Terminology mapping
| OCOM | Knowledge Graph | Equivalent |
|---|---|---|
| Object | Entity | Partial |
| Relationship | Edge | Similar |
| Identity | Node identifier | Partial |
| Metadata | Properties | Similar |
| Reference | Edge / IRI | Partial |
| Ownership | — | None |
| Lifecycle | — | None |
| Evidence | Provenance | Partial |
Conceptual differences
| Aspect | OCOM | Knowledge Graph |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Governs operational objects and their reality | Represents knowledge as entities and relationships |
| Nature | An operating model with rules and conformance | A data structure for facts |
| Governance | First-class: ownership, policy, constraint, contract | Not defined by the model |
| Lifecycle | First-class: objects have states over time | Not defined by the model |
Capability matrix
| Capability | OCOM | Knowledge Graph |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | ||
| Relationships | ||
| Metadata | ||
| Lifecycle | – | |
| Governance | – | |
| Ownership | – | |
| Provenance / Evidence | Partial | |
| AI retrieval |
Interoperability
- An OCOM model MAY be represented as a Knowledge Graph; OCOM already publishes its own graph as JSON-LD.
- A Knowledge Graph MAY store OCOM objects and relationships, but does not itself provide governance, lifecycle or ownership.
- The recommended composition is to use a Knowledge Graph as one projection of an OCOM model, not as a replacement for it.
References
- OCOM Object
- OCOM Relationship
- OCOM Reference
- RDF and property-graph knowledge-graph models