SharePoint Schema discourse

Date: 2025 08-August 21

CG 0

SharePoint is one of those things that can either be a total mess or a lifesaver, depending on how it’s set up.

Here’s how it can handle what you’re describing:

🔧 Core Features You’d Use in SharePoint

  1. Document Libraries

    • Think of these like smart folders.

    • Each document gets stored in a library, and you can add columns (metadata fields) beyond just filename:

      • Project ID

      • Drawing number

      • Revision

      • Discipline (civil, mech, electrical)

      • Status (draft, issued, as-built)

      • Source (vendor, consultant, internal)

  2. Version Control (built-in)

    • Every time someone uploads a new revision, SharePoint can keep the history.

    • You can roll back if someone overwrites a file.

    • Versions are tracked at the metadata level too, so you don’t need FINAL_v3_revised_REALFINAL.pdf.

  3. Check-in / Check-out

    • Stops people from stomping on each other’s edits.

    • Gives you a bit of a poor-man’s CAD document control system.

  4. Search & Filters

    • Since metadata is indexed, you can filter like a database:

      • “Show me all drawings tagged Project A, Mechanical discipline, Revision C.”

    • Much more powerful than just searching filenames.

  5. Workflows / Power Automate (optional, but killer if you go this route)

    • Automate approvals, document review, notifications.

    • Example: Upload a new vendor drawing → auto-email project manager → when approved, auto-move it into “Approved Drawings” library.

  6. Permissions

    • You can control who can upload/edit/view on a per-library or per-folder basis.

    • Useful if you have external consultants/vendors dropping files in.

🚨 The Catch

🆚 Spreadsheet vs Database vs SharePoint

👉 Question back for you:
Do you want SharePoint to be the system of record (where files actually live), or just an indexing tool that points to existing network folders?

That answer changes how I’d recommend setting it up.

CB 1

I am trying to add a column, for managed meta data, which I am calling "Source"

CG 1

Perfect — going with SharePoint puts you right into the sweet spot where you can enforce consistency with metadata instead of chasing file names.

If you want your Source column to be Managed Metadata, here’s the right way to do it:

🛠️ Steps to Add a Managed Metadata Column in SharePoint

  1. Go to the Document Library Settings

    • Navigate to the library where you want to add the column.

    • Click the gear icon → Library settings (or List settings if it’s a list).

  2. Create a New Column

    • Under Columns, select Create column.

    • Give it the name: Source.

    • Choose Managed Metadata as the column type.

  3. Tie it to a Term Store

    • Managed Metadata means you’re pulling from the Term Store Management Tool.

    • Open the Term Store (Admin: SharePoint Admin Center → Content Services → Term store).

    • Create a new term set called something like Document Sources.

    • Add controlled terms under it (examples):

      • Vendor

      • Consultant

      • Internal Engineering

      • OEM Manual

      • Submittal

  4. Set Column Properties

    • Decide if Source should be required (recommended).

    • Allow only one value or multiple values (for example, a doc could come from “Vendor + Internal Review”).

    • Save.

  5. Use It in Views

    • Go back to the library.

    • Add the Source column to the default view so it shows in the grid.

    • Now you can filter/sort/group by Source, just like you would in a database.

✅ Benefits of Doing It This Way

⚠️ Common Gotcha: If you just add a plain “Choice” column instead of managed metadata, you’ll eventually get inconsistencies (e.g., “Vendor” vs “Vendors”). Term Store is the only way to guarantee global consistency.

Do you want me to sketch out a basic schema for other columns (like Project, Discipline, Revision, Status) that usually go hand-in-hand with Source, so you don’t box yourself in later?

CB 2

Which columns would you recommend adding for the most rigorous possible document library

CG 2

If you want your SharePoint document library to be rigorous (as in, auditable, filterable, and usable as a system of record instead of just a dumping ground), you’ll want to define a core metadata schema up front. Think of it as the “skeleton” of your document management system.

Here’s a solid recommended set of columns (with notes on which should be Managed Metadata, Choice, or Text):

🏗️ Core Columns for a Rigorous Document Library

1. Document ID / Number

2. Title / Description

3. Document Type

4. Discipline

5. Project / Work Package

6. Equipment / Asset Tag

7. Source

8. Revision

9. Status

10. Effective Date / Issue Date

11. Author / Originator

12. Reviewer / Approver

13. Confidentiality / Security Level

🔑 Extra (Depending on Your Needs)

🚨 Golden Rules

👉 Do you want me to sketch out a sample Term Store hierarchy (like how Document Type, Discipline, and Source might be structured), so you’ve got a taxonomy ready to drop in? That’ll make your SharePoint library much more future-proof.

(Sure)

Perfect — let’s draft a starter taxonomy for your SharePoint Term Store. This will give you a controlled vocabulary so your “Source,” “Document Type,” and “Discipline” fields never devolve into free-text chaos.

📚 Example SharePoint Term Store Hierarchy

🌐 Term Set: Document Type

(Defines what the document actually is)

🏗️ Term Set: Discipline

(Defines the engineering or organizational discipline)

🏢 Term Set: Source

(Defines the origin of the document)

📝 Term Set: Status

(Lifecycle state of the document)

⚙️ Term Set: Project (Optional, but scalable)

(If you want project tags consistent across libraries)

🔑 Best Practices for Term Store Design

👉 Do you want me to also map these into a recommended SharePoint library schema (which columns are required, which pull from which Term Set), so you’ve basically got a plug-and-play metadata plan?

(Sure)

Alright, here’s a plug-and-play SharePoint library schema built on top of the taxonomy we just drafted. Think of this as your “data model” for documents in SharePoint — the rules that will force consistency and make filtering powerful.

📑 Recommended SharePoint Library Schema

🔐 Required Columns

(Every document must have these)

Column Name Type Source / Term Set Notes
Document ID Auto (Doc ID svc) N/A Unique identifier; enables traceability across filenames.
Title Single line text N/A Human-readable name (“Pump Station A P&ID”).
Document Type Managed Metadata Term Set: Document Type Forces classification (Drawing, Spec, Report, etc.).
Discipline Managed Metadata Term Set: Discipline Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, etc.
Project Managed Metadata Term Set: Project Project A, Project B, etc.
Source Managed Metadata Term Set: Source Vendor, Consultant, Internal, etc.
Revision Choice Controlled list (A, B, C or 0, 1, 2) Avoids free-text chaos.
Status Managed Metadata Term Set: Status Draft, Approved, As-Built, Superseded, etc.
Issue Date Date N/A Effective date of the revision.

👥 Accountability Columns

(Track who did what)

Column Name Type Notes
Author / Originator Person/Group Who created the doc (internal or external).
Reviewer Person/Group Person responsible for review.
Approver Person/Group Final approver; makes this an audit trail.

⚙️ Optional / Advanced Columns

(Use if your organization wants extra rigor)

Column Name Type Notes
Equipment Tag Single line text (or Lookup to Asset Register) Allows linking docs to physical assets (P-101, MCC-02).
Superseded By Lookup (same library) Points to the next revision if Status = Superseded.
Confidentiality Choice (Public, Internal, Confidential, Restricted) Helps control permissions and sensitivity.
Keywords / Tags Managed Metadata Free-form tagging, but still controlled through Term Store.

🔎 Example Views You Could Create

🚨 Key Setup Notes

  1. Make the Required Columns actually required → otherwise SharePoint lets people dump files without metadata.

  2. Use Content Types if needed → if you want slightly different fields for, say, Drawings vs. O&M Manuals, define separate Content Types but keep the core schema consistent.

  3. Train your users → metadata entry is the “tax” for searchability. If people understand it saves hours later, they’ll buy in.

  4. Governance → restrict who can edit the Term Store. You want consistency, not “new term every week.”

👉 Want me to take this one step further and sketch a real-world example (say: how a vendor P&ID for Project A, Rev B would look in this schema) so you can see it in action?

CB 4

I work at a wastewater treatment facility

Our main concern is maintenance, and keeping track of records that have been handed over from contractors including construction and plans

we want to be able to leverage our documents to succeed in finding all useful information quickly to perform maintenance

CG 4

Got it 👍 — thanks for the context. Since you’re in wastewater treatment and your primary driver is maintenance efficiency, the way you set up your SharePoint library needs to prioritize:

🏗️ Tailored Schema for Wastewater Maintenance

Here’s how I’d refine the earlier schema specifically for your world:

🔐 Required Columns

Column Name Type Notes
Asset / Equipment Tag Single line text (or Managed Metadata if you have an asset register) CRITICAL for maintenance — link docs to pumps, blowers, MCCs, tanks.
Document Type Managed Metadata Examples: O&M Manual, As-Built Drawing, P&ID, Shop Drawing, Test Report, Submittal, Spare Parts List.
Discipline Managed Metadata Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, I&C, Process.
Project / Contract Managed Metadata Which project/contract delivered the doc (important for warranty/future upgrades).
Source Managed Metadata Contractor, OEM, Consultant, Internal Eng.
Revision / Version Choice Standardized (A, B, C / 0, 1, 2).
Status Managed Metadata Draft, Approved, As-Built, Superseded.
Issue Date Date When the doc/revision was issued.

👥 Accountability Columns

⚙️ Optional (but highly valuable)

🔎 Example Search Use Cases

This is where it pays off. Imagine:

🚀 Quick Wins for Your Facility

  1. Make Asset Tag REQUIRED → this is the #1 link between documents and maintenance.

  2. Standardize Document Type → especially O&M Manuals, As-Builts, Test Reports.

  3. Build Maintenance-Focused Views in SharePoint:

    • “By Asset Tag”

    • “As-Builts Only”

    • “O&M Manuals”

    • “All Superseded Docs” (so techs don’t accidentally use them)

  4. Integrate with CMMS/EAM later → if you use Maximo, Cityworks, or similar, you can link asset records to SharePoint doc URLs.

💡 This way SharePoint becomes your digital filing cabinet, but instead of just being a place where PDFs sit, it’s structured so maintenance techs can always find the right info at the right time.

👉 Question for you: do you already have an asset register (like pump/motor IDs in a CMMS), or would SharePoint itself need to become the first structured source of asset tagging? That will change whether I suggest a flat “text tag” or a formal Managed Metadata term set for assets.

CB 5

Can I have copilot AI populate some of this stuff for me, based on what it finds in the document contents?

CG 5

💯 Yes — that’s exactly where Copilot in SharePoint / M365 can shine for you. It won’t replace a good schema, but it can help auto-populate metadata by looking inside your documents (titles, headers, tables, even drawing title blocks if they’re text-based).

⚙️ What Copilot Can Do for You

  1. Suggest Metadata on Upload

    • When a contractor drops in a PDF called PumpStationA_P101_AsBuilt.pdf, Copilot can scan it:

      • Spot “P-101” in the title block → auto-suggest Asset Tag = P-101

      • Spot “As-Built” → auto-suggest Status = As-Built

      • Spot “Pump Station A” → auto-suggest Project = Upgrade 2023 (if you’ve got that term set)

  2. Summarize Document Contents

    • Click a drawing or manual → Copilot gives a summary:
      “This O&M manual covers Pump P-101, including lubrication, bearing replacement, and motor wiring (MCC-02).”

    • You can drop pieces of that summary into metadata fields.

  3. Assist Search

    • Even if metadata is missing, Copilot can answer:
      “Show me the O&M manual for blower B-301.”
      It uses semantic search (reads content, not just metadata).

  4. Bulk Classification

    • If you have a big contractor handover dump (hundreds of docs), you can select them in bulk → Copilot suggests metadata values in a batch.

🚨 Limitations / Watch-Outs

🛠️ How to Set It Up

  1. Define your schema first (the columns we laid out earlier).

  2. Enable Copilot in SharePoint (requires M365 Copilot license).

  3. Train your team:

    • Don’t trust it blindly — treat suggestions like a spell-checker.

    • Confirm/adjust before saving.

  4. Iterate: build a feedback loop (e.g., if it mislabels a vendor manual as “internal,” correct it, and Copilot improves).

🚀 Dream Workflow (Wastewater Maintenance Example)

👉 So yes — Copilot can do a lot of the grunt work of populating metadata, but the secret sauce is: you design the schema, Copilot fills it in, humans approve.

Do you want me to show you a practical rollout strategy — like “Phase 1: get schema in place, Phase 2: start with one project handover set, Phase 3: turn Copilot loose on the back-catalog”? That way you don’t drown in a big migration all at once.

CB 6

Can i have copilot crawl existing files?

CG 6

Yes — you can have Copilot (or more broadly, Microsoft 365 AI features) work with existing files, but there are some specifics to understand.

How it Works

  1. Files must be in SharePoint or OneDrive for Business

    • Copilot doesn’t automatically read random network drives or local folders.

    • You’d need to migrate existing PDFs, drawings, and manuals into a SharePoint library.

  2. Metadata Crawling

    • Once files are in SharePoint:

      • Copilot can read the contents of documents (text in PDFs, Word, Excel, etc.).

      • It can suggest values for your Managed Metadata columns based on what it finds.

    • For scanned drawings or images, you’ll need OCR first (SharePoint can OCR PDFs with text layers).

  3. Bulk Processing

    • You can select multiple documents → Copilot will attempt to populate metadata in batch.

    • Suggestions can then be reviewed and confirmed before being applied.

  4. Search & Semantic Understanding

    • Even if you don’t tag every document manually, Copilot can search the content to answer queries like:

      “Show me all O&M manuals for Pump P-101.”

    • It can read tables, text blocks, and extract key information (asset tags, project names, drawing numbers).

⚠️ Caveats

  1. Move all existing documents into a new library with your rigorous metadata schema.

  2. Enable Copilot and let it scan the library for suggested metadata.

  3. Review in batches — don’t let it tag everything blindly.

  4. Iterate and refine term sets (Document Type, Discipline, Source, Asset Tag) as Copilot encounters new patterns.

  5. Once confident, expand to the rest of your facility’s handover records.

If you want, I can outline a practical phased rollout plan for Copilot-assisted metadata population specifically for a wastewater treatment facility — like, first 1 system, then 1 plant section, then full facility — so you don’t get overwhelmed.