- From: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:59:56 -0400
- To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org
Thanks Phil for the clarification! If the intent is to provide additional vocabulary peculiar to registered LEs for the purpose of (in essence) extending and complementing ORG, et.al., then I vote for one of... * Registered Legal Entity * Registered Entity * Registered Corporation ...in that order ;) On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: > > > On 18/10/2012 13:41, John Erickson wrote: >> >> I think "Legal Entity" is strong choice, based on the commonly >> accepted definition of "legal entity," which includes a laundry-list >> of "entity" types that may enter into legal contracts. >> >> Recent popular usage has tilted toward financial institutions, but >> that is largely due to the push for LEIs, driven by certain >> policymaking. I think our work should concern the broader concept of >> the "legal entity" and the definition of a vocabulary that may be >> rigorously applied to *any* manner of LE's, including associations, >> corporations (for-profit or not), partnerships, proprietorships, >> trusts, or indeed individuals. >> >> Thus, it's not clear to me what registration has to do with >> it...unless indeed we intend to exclude legal entities that aren't >> registered. In which case, I wonder how we describe unregistered legal >> entities. >> >> Perhaps I'm missing something here... > > > Only that org:FormalOrganization is the class we have for the range of Legal > Entities you mention. That's done and agreed as part of ORG. What we're > after here is entries in a register, the act of registration being what > creates the legal entity, hence various options around "Registered foo bar". > > HTH? > > Phil. > > > >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 10/18/2012 05:31 AM, Dave Reynolds wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 18/10/12 09:51, Government Linked Data Working Group Issue Tracker >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ISSUE-38 (Registered what?): Name of the vocab formerly known as Core >>>>> Business Vocabulary, currently called Legal Entity [Organization >>>>> Ontology] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/38 >>>>> >>>>> Raised by: Phil Archer >>>>> On product: Organization Ontology >>>>> >>>>> The WG recently resolved to change the name of the 'Core Business >>>>> Vocabulary' as the term was considered too broad and misleading. No >>>>> objections anywhere. >>>>> >>>>> However, it turns out that the choice of what to rename it to was >>>>> unfortunate. I'd like to resolve this as part of the ORG to LC debate >>>>> to >>>>> clarify the relationship with it (although this does not in any way >>>>> affect >>>>> ORG itself). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Seems entirely reasonable to me (IANAC - I am not a chair) to discuss >>>> this as a neighbouring agenda item but don't make it part of moving org >>>> to >>>> LC. >>>> >>>> [snip] >>>> >>>>> 1. Registered business entity (recommended by Rigo) >>>>> >>>>> 2. Registered corporate entity (in line with Sandro's view). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Either of these is fine by me. >>>> >>>> In British English then corporation has a specific meaning (by Royal >>>> charter). I would guess that in the UK most people's exposure to the >>>> term >>>> corporation, other than the BBC, is in the context of large US-based >>>> companies so it has a subjective connotation of "big (commercial) >>>> business" >>>> whatever the technicalities under US law. However, I don't think that is >>>> fatal as a name for the vocabulary, the vocab itself will be specific >>>> about >>>> what it means. >>> >>> >>> >>> "Corporate" definitely has that connotation in US English as well. >>> "Corporation" a little less. I think "Incorporated" is mostly free of >>> it, >>> which makes me think "Incorporated Organization" might be a good term >>> here. >>> I guess it still has the problem of including the BBC. >>> >>> I'm fine with Registered Legal Entity. >>> >>> >>>> One other option is simply "registered organization vocabulary", >>>> technically we can regard it as a profile of ORG after all. >>>> >>> >>> Or, yeah, that's okay, too. It's not clear what kind of registration >>> one >>> has in mind there -- it might include US partnerships which are >>> registered >>> as having a business license but not being incorporated, I think. My >>> understanding is this vocabulary was only meant to cover the kind of >>> registration that makes an entity able to legally possess assets and >>> liabilities. But, yeah, registered organization is fine with me. >>> >>> -- Sandro >>>> >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > > > Phil Archer > W3C eGovernment > http://www.w3.org/egov/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1 -- John S. Erickson, Ph.D. Director, Web Science Operations Tetherless World Constellation (RPI) <http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com> Twitter & Skype: olyerickson
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 13:00:27 UTC