On 06/08/2010 12:27 AM, William Waites wrote:
On 10-06-03 16:04, Dave Reynolds wrote:
It would be great if you could suggest a better phrasing of the
description of a FormalOrganization that would better encompass the
range of entities you think should go there? Or are you advocating that
the distinction between a generic organization and a externally
recognized semi-autonomous organization is not a useful one?


Reading the rest of your mail, I think the latter. Do we really need
FormalOrganisation at all? Can we not just have Organisation and
then some extension vocabulary could have subclasses for different
flavours of partnerships, corporations, unincorporated associations
etc. as needed?

Sorry for jumping in. I was thinking that

a) the way i get FormalOrganization, it could as well be called LegalEntity to be more precise.

b) what happens when organizations change legal status?

More on the latter - If you'd like to make having evolving graphs easier, you might as well make some legal-status a property and have anyone use URIs that work best for them.

Which BTW makes adoption easier as well; Gov's might even pick it up and adapt to their local legal definitions of organization types or something, but any logic code made for plain old Organization will know how to deal with those.

Cheers,

Manos



--
Manos Batsis, Chief Technologist
         __    _
  ____ _/ /_  (_)_________ ____ ______
 / __ `/ __ \/ / ___/ ___// __ `/ ___/
/ /_/ / /_/ / (__  |__  )/ /_/ / /
\__,_/_.___/_/____/____(_)__, /_/
                        /____/
http://www.Abiss.gr
19, Kalvou Street,
14231, Nea Ionia,
Athens, Greece

Tel: +30 211-1027-900
Fax: +30 211-1027-999

http://gr.linkedin.com/in/manosbatsis

<<attachment: manos.vcf>>

Reply via email to