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

Re: Organization ontology

From: Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:50:03 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTim5i_rZt-xSJqRLeVDIqprWQJNeFyC9blDcLmE_@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@googlemail.com>, William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, William Waites <ww-keyword-okfn.193365@styx.org>, "Emmanouil Batsis (Manos)" <manos@abiss.gr>
Large corporations often have multiple legal entities and many informal,
somewhat overlapping business organizations. Just saying. I wrangled with
that. There're several different use cases for these for internal vs
external, customer/vendor, financial vs operations, etc.

On Jun 7, 2010 3:19 PM, "Mike Norton" <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:

I can see Manos' point.   It seems that LegalEntity rather the Organization
would work well under a sub-domain such as .LAW or .DOJ or .SEC, but under
other sub-domains such as .NASA, the Organization element might be better
served as ProjectName.   All instances would help specify the Organization
type, while keeping Organization as the general unstylized element is
probably ideal, as inferred by William Waites.

 Michael A. Norton



 ------------------------------
*>>From:* Emmanouil Batsis (Manos) manos@abiss.gr

>>
>>a) the way i get FormalOrganization, it could as well be called
LegalEntity to be more precise....
Received on Monday, 7 June 2010 23:50:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 June 2010 23:50:34 GMT