Re: ISSUE-45 (RegAddress): Align treatment of registered addresses between Org and RegOrg [Organization Ontology]

I'm delighted to say that Agis is working on the doc at the moment and 
I'll let him respond to the many (welcome) comments since my last 
intervention (I really must do other things today).

On this issue, my understanding is that option a is not possible 
although I would love to be proved wrong, i.e. I believe vCard and 
INSPIRE are not compatible.

Take this address snippet:

Flat 3, 15 Bridge Road

in vCard that's

extended address "Flat 3"
street address "15 Bridge Road"

INSPIRE splits it up differently

locator "Flat 3, 15"
thoroughfare "Bridge Road".

Actually, I get confused between INSPIRE's locator and locator 
designator, it might be:

locator designator "Flat 3"
locator "15"
thoroughfare "Bridge Road"

the key thing is, vCard:street-address includes the building number, 
inspire:thoroughfare does not. You can map from INSPIRE to vCard but not 
the other way around.

Other differences are trivial - vCard has its label property which is 
absent in INSPIRE and INSPIRE demands the presence of an address 
identifier which is a UUID. Every address in the world has/is being 
assigned a UUID, irrespective of its textual form. This is all going on 
under ISO 19160-1 which is a major effort to improve address data 
interop. The soon to be announced chairs of the LOCADD CG are involved 
in that process.

In short, this is a big area and I believe we'd do well to leave it alone!

And so I think we're heading for option b which is fine. 
org:hasRegisteredSite covers what we need AFAICS. But where the address 
is given in non-vCard format it needs to use something other than 

This perhaps creates a problem of perception, however false, of "Org 
uses vCard therefore using Org implies I must use vCard" so I think we 
should say explicitly somewhere that other address serialisations are 

Perhaps section 2.3 of ORG, that currently says:

"The ontology provides org:siteAddress to define the address of a site 
using the vCard [ VCARD  ] vocabulary."

could be extended to say:

"The ontology provides org:siteAddress to define the address of a site 
using the vCard [ VCARD  ] vocabulary. Serializations of addresses other 
than vCard may be used but should be linked using the appropriate term 
from the alternative vocabulary rather than org:siteAddress."

I understand that this extra wording is redundant in many ways, but 
suggest that it does add clarity.

Whatever the resolution of the issue, it may end up as an LC comment.


On 25/10/2012 09:23, Government Linked Data Working Group Issue Tracker 
> ISSUE-45 (RegAddress): Align treatment of registered addresses between Org and RegOrg [Organization Ontology]
> Raised by: Richard Cyganiak
> On product: Organization Ontology
> It seems there is a relationship between rov:registeredAddress and org:hasRegisteredSite/org:siteAddress that should be documented. Ideally, there should be uniform treatment. It would be unfortunate if ORG requires one encoding for the address, and RegOrg requires an incompatible second one.
>>From the thread at :
> ORG uses vCard. However, vCard is not INSPIRE conformant. The registeredAddress property is intended to link to an INSPIRE-conformant address class soon. This relates to the LOCADD CG which is currently being held up by a bit of EC bureaucracy. On the other hand, it is unclear why "INSPIRE compatibility" (with its European focus) should be a requirement for a W3C spec, though it is understandable why it is for ISA.
> Among our options are:
> (1) To find a way to encode INSPIRE conformant addresses within vCard.
> (2) Have RegOrg use org:hasRegisteredSite and then have it or some other (possibly non-GLD) vocabulary provide a non-vcard means to express addresses of a site. Using a resource to identify a site, independent of the particular serialization conventions for its address, is probably a good thing, and may be something that RegOrg could adopt. There's nothing to stop an org:Site having other expressions of address information.


Phil Archer
W3C eGovernment
+44 (0)7887 767755

Received on Thursday, 25 October 2012 08:58:22 UTC