Your PKM posts are always interesting, even if I don't always agree with everything :-)

I think the DIKW model is fine for explaining the basic idea. Unfortunately, there is not always 100% agreement on what each part actually is.

I'll use this explanation:
Data is symbols, information is processed data (who, what, where, when) while knowledge is expertise that answers "how" questions. You may also use wisdom to answer the "why".

I think your "sense" part is important
- make sense of data = information
- make sense of information = knowledge
- make sense of knowledge = wisdom

The "knowledge" part is often context-sensitive (information applied in a certain context) while wisdom is usually reached after reflection and experience (if reached at all) and is often very subjective (I guess as we move from D to I to K to W it gets less objective and more subjective ?)

PKM itself will not make us any wiser, but it can *help us* become wiser by helping us *make sense* of the information and knowledge that we have. I like this part of your model !

However, it is important to note that the last, final step is not Share (as it seems like in your model), but USE !

Knowledge (or wisdom, for that matter) is of no value if it isn't USED ! It doesn't matter if YOU use it, or if you Share it and OTHERS use it, but the ultimate goal is to make Sense of the data and information so that it can be USED by someone (for something).

Well, at least this is *my* opinion :-)

My 2 cents on this:
- http://www.ppcsoft.com/blog/km-3-1.asp