Re: Returning to onlineAccount > OnlineAccount

The issue isn't whether or not such organizations are legitimate but their
need to exist for the purposes of declaring online accounts.

Or, more concisely, a organization need not have (or declare) sub-units in
order to have multiple online accounts with another organization like
Facebook.

Intended areas notwithstanding, this is clear when it comes to languages.
A US company may, for example, have separate Twitter accounts for English
and Spanish, but there's no easy mechanism to declare these - and I don't
think it's a reasonable expectation that one must have an sub-organization
of Acme Inc. like "Acme Inc. - Ayuda en Español" to declare the Spanish
Twitter account.

(How do you play soccer with only five guys?:)

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> For example, IBM has a Twitter account for France, in French:
>> https://twitter.com/ibm_france
>>
>> But AFAIK there's no organization "IBM France".  Nor is there a separate
>> top-level domain or subdomain for French speakers in France accessing IBM
>> material, but only a folder-level web presence [3] - making it impossible
>> to unambiguously declare @ibm_france as "the Twitter account available in
>> French for IBM users in France" using the Google method.
>>
>>
> Sidenote: IBM France is a division of IBM...but who cares... it's still an
> organization in a nutshell.  Most enterprises have regional or country
> level divisions with applicable taxes or NOT ;) and some maybe legal
> entities or not...but they are still sub-organizations for the parent
> organization with their own culture, webpages, brochures, OnlineAccounts,
> etc.  Incidentally, in Freebase we called them divisions also.
> Organizations in schema.org or just that with no requirement for
> legalization, btw, like my weekend casual soccer club of 5 guys.
>
> Thad
> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>
>