W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > June 2010

Re: Organization ontology

From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 22:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <182987.29984.qm@web82403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
Cc: "Stuart A. Yeates" <syeates@gmail.com>, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@googlemail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Get Kurzweil to do it!
 
Michael A. Norton
 




________________________________
From: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Cc: Stuart A. Yeates <syeates@gmail.com>; Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@googlemail.com>; Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>; "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 10:49:57 PM
Subject: Re: Organization ontology


Cool! Let me know when that's ready. End of the week ok? ;P lol

Sent from my iPhone

On 02/06/2010, at 15:47, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:


Or, in the U.S. we could just partition a new web with top level domains reflective of the agencies and departments financed by our tax dollars.  Open Gov!
> 
>Michael A. Norton
> 
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
From: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
>To: Stuart A. Yeates
> <syeates@gmail.com>
>Cc: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@googlemail.com>; Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>; "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
>Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 10:22:12 PM
>Subject: Re: Organization ontology
>
>>Good point!
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On 02/06/2010, at 15:06, "Stuart A. Yeates" <syeates@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Dave Reynolds
>> <dave.e.reynolds@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> We would like to announce the availability of an ontology for description of
>>> organizational structures including government organizations.
>>> 
>>> This was motivated by the needs of the data.gov.uk project. After some
>>> checking we were unable to find an existing ontology that precisely met our
>>> needs and so developed this generic core, intended to be extensible to
>>> particular domains of use.
>>> 
>>> [1] http://www.epimorphics.com/public/vocabulary/org.html
>> 
>> I think this is great, but I'm a little worried that a number of
>> Western (and specifically Westminister) assumptions may have been
>> built into it.
>> 
>> What would be great would be to see a handful of different
>> organisations (or portions of them) from different traditions
>> modelled. Maybe:
>> * The tripartite system at the top of US government, which seems
>> pretty complex to me, with former Presidents apparently retaining some
>> control after they leave office
>> * The governance model of the Vatican City and Catholic Church
>> * The Asian royalty model, in which an informal royalty commonly
>> appears to sit above a formal constitution
>> 
>> cheers
>> stuart
>> 
>
>
>


      
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2010 05:51:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 2 June 2010 05:51:02 GMT