Re: RegOrg update + co-editor

Have we reached out to Chris Taggart of Open Corporates for feedback?


Here are editorial comments for RegOrg:

Why abbreviate the class to rov:RegOrg when we use full words like org:FormalOrganization elsewhere?

"It is notable that some jurisdictions regard the use of any name other than the primary Legal Name as suspicious." is a fun fact, but what's it doing in this document?

The introduction uses the tense "This is a vocabulary for describing organizations that have gained legal entity status". The abstract should use the same tense.

On 2012-10-22, at 12:49 PM, Phil Archer wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> Following the resolution of the name, I have updated the draft spec and RDF schema for the Registered Organization Ontology [1].
> 
> Even better news, I'm delighted that Agis Papantoniou of NTUA, who joined us recently as an IE, has also agreed to co-edit this spec. I asked Agis based on the work he's told us about at NTUA on publicspending.gr which is using RegOrg I believe (it will now whatever ;-) )
> 
> I've added a new section that makes the relationship with ORG explicit.
> 
> It refers to ADMS for some of its datatypes, notably adms:Identifier. I've actually amended the latter [2]. The UN/CEFACT complex type on which adms:Identifier is based has separate fields for the actual identifier string and its type. I've tightened up the definition to make it clear that the type should be provided as a datatype on the skos:notation value. This keeps the SPARQL query that derives the org:identifier as simple as it is. Earlier on today I was playing with SPARQL queries that included STRDT() functions to append the value of a dcterms:type property as the datatype for a skos:notation property and it was just horrible. :-(
> 
> The change in name also made it seem better the rename what was originally the legalIdentifer property to rov:registration.
> 
> Taking on board the comments received about ADMS I have included RDF encodings throughout.
> 
> If folk have time to review this actually very short vocab spec, I would be very grateful. There is a team in Brussels actively promoting it and ORG so if the WG agrees, then its publication as an FPWD would be very welcome. Also, Peter Krantz [3] is busy implementing it in Sweden (and screaming at me to get the schema in place!)
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Phil.
> 
> [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/legal/index.html
> [2] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/adms/index.html#data-types
> [3] https://twitter.com/peterkz_swe
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Phil Archer
> W3C eGovernment
> http://www.w3.org/egov/
> 
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 23:10:18 UTC