Hi Ralph,
Thank you for pointing me to those schemas.
Of course, this is the exact issue I was hoping to avoid. For example, in the three graphs you mentioned, there are 261 definitions, 107 (41%) of which do not have any comments explaining their intended meaning or use (see query below). Of the 261 definitions, roughly 120 are classes.
Now my task must be understanding the meaning and intended use of all of the classes and determining what Azure (or GCP or AWS) resource most closely aligns so that I can extend or use the correct class, otherwise, I won't be able to use EDG functionality like lineage, etc... If I didn't care about integrating with the EDG ontologies, it would be easier to just make my own ontologies to support Azure, GCP & AWS. I can export a json file from Azure that effectively contains instance data from which I can derive an ontology - which also means I can auto-populate EDG with the Azure structure.
This type of mapping needs to be done only once. Maybe this is an opportunity for TQ to create another asset collection type and sell it as an add-on?
As a side note, the ETL and Infrastructure schemas you shared are not accessible from the Includes tab. I had to open them using the Files asset collection to get them to show up in the EDG UI. (This also entailed unlocking the workspace). Maybe there is another way that I missed.
Also, I noticed a number of "empty property shapes" on edg:AzureDataBricksPipeline, coming from a superclass. (see attached file). Walking up the tree shows one undefined property shape at edg:System. The label on this class does not match the URI - rdfs:label = "Software System". Five more can be found at edg:EnterpriseEnabler. Additionally, edg:AssetClass contains four undefined property shapes. This is only what I found in the cursory look. A query would be better (or maybe a SHACL rule?) to find all of the "hanging" shapes. Of course, it may be that the missing shapes are defined graphs that are not imported into these graphs.
Tim