Re: ISSUE-38 (Registered what?): Name of the vocab formerly known as Core Business Vocabulary, currently called Legal Entity [Organization Ontology]

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
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 11:36:51 UTC