Hi Quico, Thanks for your info about JOINS between PRODUCTS and COMPANIES. It gets me thinking of just how complex it can be. Concerning PRODUCTS what instantly pops into my mind (with an accounting/finance background) is that the PRODUCT object should ideally fall singularly into one of the COMPANY's reported SEGMENTS (finest granular detail in public financial statements). Then there should be a reasonable ability to sum up sales by company by INDUSTRY. Then each industry should report singularly into a SECTOR, and the sum of all the sectors should agree with GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT. For example, here is one listing of INDUSTRIES: Aerospace & Defense Electronics | Airfreight & Surface Transportation | Airlines | Alternative Energy | Autos & Auto Parts | Business, Education & Professional Services | Chemicals | Electric Utilities | Electrical Equipment & Multi-Industry | Engineering & Construction | Food Producers | Food Retailers | Gaming & Lodging | Homebuilders & Building Products | Integrated Oil | Leisure | Machinery | Master Limited Partnerships (energy sector) | Metals & Mining | Paper & Packaging | Restaurants | Retailing/Broadlines & Hardlines | Retailing/Department Stores & Specialty Softlines | Semiconductors | Shipping | Software | Telecom & Networking Equipment. The above need to be aggregated. For example the following economic SECTORS: Basic Materials | Capital Goods/Industrials | Consumer | Energy | Technology, Media & Telecommunications International flow of goods (via product category, customs designations, import/export duties, etc.), regional, national and full global INPUT - OUTPUT tables, and analysis of transportation (freight at the regional, state, national and international levels) -- all very much rely on high quality PRODUCT classifications at the granular level. The devil is in the details, especially when there is inter divisional sales, and inter company ownership. Accountants want to tabulate direct and indirect COSTS, leading to PROFIT/LOSS. Economists want to tabulate output and VALUE ADDED, for the most part unconcerned with INVENTORY buildup. The two models are difficult to fully reconcile without well tagged granular data. Another random thought is relating TRADE NAMES, BRANDS and PRODUCTS; along with generic and industry descriptions. PATENT by country is also important. Then from some (distant in my case) exposure to manufacturing there are things like the RAW MATERIALS, BILL OF MATERIALS, EXPLOSION of the BoM into manufacturing steps (and lead times, labor requirement by JOB TITLE), ASSEMBLIES or MODULES, WORK IN PROCESS INVENTORY, and FINAL PRODUCTS. I think of the practical aspects of auto parts - all those books and diagrams, plus all the vendors offering the same part - yet you still often need an experienced parts counter person (Sherpa / expert) to get the correct part on the first try. Wiper blades/spark plugs/oil filter/head lamps cross reference charts...over time a real nightmare. Appliance manufacture and spare parts wholesaler "games" with part numbers to obfuscate reality and maintain proprietary sales flows. Non OEM repair parts. Of the pillars of linked-data: * People * Places (geo-names) * Organizations (corporate, public, non profit, trade, social....) * Tme/data(Events) * Products I think Products is probably the very most difficult for free/open source to really address well. And then there are the services... Rick On 1/20/2017 6:46 AM, Quico Prol wrote: