- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:52:04 -0700
- To: public-vocabs@w3.org
Ok, then in that case I would suggest that we drop that sentence, unless someone can explain further what it means in terms of the data entry. kc On 6/17/14, 1:39 PM, Wallis,Richard wrote: > I was just taking and tweaking a bit the current description of > provider: “The person or organization providing the service, > reservation, or creative work. The provider may subcontract out the > service.” > > ~Richard > > On 17 Jun 2014, at 20:46, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net > <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote: > >> Richard, can you explain what the 'subcontract' bit is about? Are you >> saying that one should encode the provider, not the subcontractor? >> >> My gut feeling is that knowing who has subcontracted to whom may be a >> bridge too far, so maybe provider should just be... who you wish to >> call the provider. >> >> kc >> >> On 6/17/14, 10:42 AM, Wallis,Richard wrote: >>> Maybe “The person or organization providing the service, item, product, >>> reservation, or creative work. The provider may subcontract out the >>> supply of such.” - would be fractionally better. >>> >>> ~Richard >>> >>> On 17 Jun 2014, at 18:40, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org >>> <mailto:Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> >>> <mailto:Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>> wrote: >>> >>>> Building on your suggestions, I would be tempted to change the >>>> description of ‘provider' to “The person or organization providing the >>>> service, item, reservation, or creative work. The provider may >>>> subcontract out the supply of such.”, >>> >> >> -- >> Karen Coyle >> kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net >> m: 1-510-435-8234 >> skype: kcoylenet >> > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 13:52:34 UTC