W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > October 2012

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

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:54:33 +0100
Message-ID: <507FFC09.6080608@w3.org>
To: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>
CC: public-gld-wg@w3.org

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".



> 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

+44 (0)7887 767755
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 12:55:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:52:04 UTC