--- a/legal/index.html Mon Oct 22 15:51:11 2012 +0100
+++ b/legal/index.html Mon Oct 22 15:52:16 2012 +0100
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
<head>
- <title>Legal Entity Vocabulary</title>
- <meta name="description" content="A vocabulary for describing businesses that gain legal entity status through a formal registration process." />
+ <title>Registered Organization Vocabulary</title>
+ <meta name="description" content="A vocabulary for describing organizations that gain legal entity status through a formal registration process." />
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<!--[if lt IE 9]>
<script src="http://www.w3.org/2008/site/js/html5shiv.js"></script> <![endif]-->
@@ -12,7 +12,6 @@
<style type="text/css">
table {
border-collapse:collapse;
- max-width:30em;
}
td, th {
border:1px solid black;
@@ -22,9 +21,6 @@
table#namespaces td {
font-family: monospace;
}
- table.definition td.prop {
- width:10em;
- }
table tr.midtable th {
border-top: black medium double;
}
@@ -63,22 +59,16 @@
</style>
</head>
<body>
-<div class="editorsnote">
-<p>To do before FPWD:</p><ul>
- <li>add definitions of datatypes for Text, Code, Identifier (refer to <a href="http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/adms/index.html">ADMS</a> for this);</li>
- <li>resolve range for registered address;</li>
- <li>ensure RDF schema/namespace doc also ready (current versions are <a href="http://philarcher.org/isa/legal20121004.rdf">RDF</a> <a href="http://philarcher.org/isa/legal20121004.html">HTML</a>).</li>
-</ul>
-</div>
<section id="abstract">
-<p>This is a vocabulary for describing businesses that gain legal entity status
-through a formal registration process, typically in a national or regional company register.
-This document is a companion to the namespace document at <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/legal-entity">http://www.w3.org/ns/legal-entity</a></p>
+<p>This is a vocabulary for describing organizations that gain legal entity status
+through a formal registration process, typically in a national or regional register.
+This document is a companion to the namespace document at <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg">http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg</a></p>
+<p class="editorsnote">NB. For this Ed Draft, see <a href="regorg20121022.rdf">regorg20121022.rdf</a></p>
</section>
<section id="sotd">
- <p>This is the First Public Working Draft of the Legal Entity Vocabulary in W3C's TR space and
+ <p>This is the First Public Working Draft of the Registered Organization Vocabulary in W3C's TR space and
signals its move to the Recommendations Track. It was first developed as the 'Business Core Vocabulary'
by PwC EU Services on behalf of the European Commission and
<a href="http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/adms/home">published by the European Commission</a>.
@@ -89,15 +79,16 @@
<section class="informative">
<h2 id="intro">Introduction</h2>
-<p>This is a vocabulary for describing businesses that have gained legal entity status
-through a formal registration process, typically in a national or regional company register.
-It focuses solely on legal entities and excludes sole traders, virtual organizations
-and other types of 'agent' that are able to do business. It may be seen as a specialization of the more
-flexible and comprehensive Organization Ontology [[ORG]].</p>
-<p>It includes classes and properties that are designed to capture the typical details recorded
+<p>This is a vocabulary for describing organizations that have gained legal entity status
+through a formal registration process, typically in a national or regional register.
+It focuses solely on such organizations and excludes natural persons, virtual organizations
+and other types of legal entity or 'agent' that are able to act. It should be seen as a specialization of the more
+flexible and comprehensive Organization Ontology [[ORG]]. The relationship between the Registered
+Organization Vocabulary and the Organization Ontology is described <a href="#relOrg">below</a>.</p>
+<p>The Registered Organization Vocabulary includes classes and properties that are designed to capture the typical details recorded
by business registers and thereby facilitate information exchange between them,
although there is significant variation between business registers in what they record and
-publish.
+publish. </p>
<p>The original development of the vocabulary was carried out under the
Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrations (<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/isa/">ISA Programme</a>)
@@ -106,36 +97,80 @@
bodies and independent experts whose work was published in April 2012 [[CV1]].
That document includes the history and motivation behind the development of a set of three interlinked
Core Vocabularies of which this is one.</p>
-<p>This version of the Legal Entity vocabulary builds on that work in a broader, global context.</p>
+<p>This version of the Registered Organization vocabulary, RegORG, builds on that work in a broader, global context.</p>
</section>
+<section class="informative">
+<h2 id="relOrg">Relationship with the Organization Ontology</h2>
+<p>A Registered Organization (<code>rov:RegOrg</code>) is a sub class of
+the Organization Ontology's Formal Organization (<code>org:FormalOrganization</code>).
+Furthermore, RegORG includes three sub properties of ORG's classification property covering
+status, activity and type.</p>
+<p>The key difference is the way in which identifiers are handled. In the ORG ontology, an organization
+may have an identifier expressed as a datatyped string (it uses a sub property of <code>skos:notation</code>).
+For Registered Organizations, it is the identifier issued by the relevant registration authority that
+confers legal status and therefore always has particular significance. RegORG uses the ADMS class
+of Identifier (based on the UN/CEFACT class of the same name) to allow statements to be made
+<em>about</em> the identifier in a way not possible on ORG. Given data about a Registered Organization,
+it is possible to derive an <code>org:identifier</code> but the inverse is not true.</p>
+<p>The following table summarizes the relationship between the two vocabularies.</p>
+
+<table>
+ <tr><th>RegORG</th><th>relationship</th><th>ORG</th></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>rov:RegOrg</code></td><td><code>rdfs:subClass</code></td><td><code>org:FormalOrganization</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>rov:companyType</code></td><td><code>rdfs:subProperty</code></td><td><code>org:classification</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>rov:companyStatus</code></td><td><code>rdfs:subProperty</code></td><td><code>org:classification</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>rov:companyActivity</code></td><td><code>rdfs:subProperty</code></td><td><code>org:classification</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><p>Given data such as:</p>
+ <pre>
+<http://example.com/id/123456>
+ rov:registration <http://example.com/id/li123456> .
+
+<http://example.com/id/li123456> a adms:Identifier ;
+ skos:notation "123456"^^ex:idType .
+ </pre></td>
+
+ <td><p>This SPARQL query</p>
+ <pre>CONSTRUCT {
+ ?org org:identifier ?id .
+} WHERE {
+ ?org rov:registration [skos:notation ?id] .
+}</pre></td>
+ <td>yields the <code>org:identifier</code> property and value, i.e.
+<pre>
+<http://example.com/id/123456>
+ org:identifer "123456"^^ex:idType .</pre></td></tr>
+
+</table>
+</section>
+
+
<section id="conformance">
-<p>A data interchange, however that interchange occurs, is conformant with the Legal Entity
+<p>A data interchange, however that interchange occurs, is conformant with the Registered Organization
vocabulary if:</p><ul>
<li>it uses the terms (classes and properties)in a way consistent with their semantics as declared in this specification;</li>
<li>it does not use terms from other vocabularies instead of ones defined in this vocabulary that could reasonably be used.</li>
</ul>
<p>A conforming data interchange:</p><ul>
<li><span class="rfc2119">may</a> include terms from other vocabularies;</li>
-<li><span class="rfc2119">may</a> use only a subset of Legal Entity vocabulary terms.</li>
+<li><span class="rfc2119">may</a> use only a subset of Registered Organization vocabulary terms.</li>
</ul>
-<p>A Legal Entity profile is a specification for data interchange that adds additional constraints. Such additional
+<p>A Registered Organization application profile is a specification for data interchange that adds additional constraints. Such additional
constraints in a profile may include:</p></ul>
<li>a minimum set of required terms; </li>
-<li>classes and properties for additional terms not covered in the Legal Entity vocabulary;</li>
+<li>classes and properties for additional terms not covered in the Registered Organization vocabulary;</li>
<li>controlled vocabularies or URI sets as acceptable values for properties;</li>
-<li>guidance on the use of pairs of inverse properties (such as selecting only one member of the pair to
-be included, or requiring that both members be explicitly included).</li></ul>
-<p>The Legal Entity Vocabulary is technology-neutral and a publisher may use any of the terms defined in this
+</ul>
+<p>The Registered Organization Vocabulary is technology-neutral and a publisher may use any of the terms defined in this
document encoded in any technology although RDF and XML are preferred.</p>
</section>
<section>
<h2 id="ns">Namespaces</h2>
-<p>The namespace for the Legal Entity vocabulary is <code>http://www.w3.org/ns/legal-entity#</code> and the preferred prefix is
-<code>legal-entity</code>. A full set of namespaces and prefixes used in this document is shown in the table below.</p>
+<p>The namespace for the Registered Organization vocabulary is <code>http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg#</code> and the preferred prefix is
+<code>rov</code>. A full set of namespaces and prefixes used in this document is shown in the table below.</p>
<table id="namespaces">
<thead><tr><th>Prefix</th><th>Namespace</th></tr></thead>
@@ -149,71 +184,40 @@
</table>
</section>
-
-<section class="informative">
-<h2 id="terminology">Terminology</h2>
-<p>This document uses the following terminology:</p>
-<P><strong>Semantic interoperability</strong> is defined by the European Interoperability Framework 2.02
-[[EIF2]] as the ability of information and communication
-technology (ICT) systems and the business processes they support to exchange data and to
-enable the sharing of information and knowledge: Semantic Interoperability enables systems to
-combine received information with other information resources and to process it in a meaningful
-manner. It aims at the mental representations that
-human beings have of the meaning of any given data.</p>
-<p>The European Commission defines a <strong>semantic interoperability asset</strong> as highly reusable metadata (e.g. xml schemata,
-generic data models) and reference data (e.g. code lists, taxonomies, dictionaries,
-vocabularies) which is used for eGovernment system development [[TOGD]].</p>
-<p>This definition is sufficiently broad to allow the inclusion of descriptions of various types of
-(meta)data to be included and managed in asset repositories. Possible types are for example
-specifications, guideline documents, metadata schemas, code lists, controlled vocabularies, and
-references to various types of entities in the real world, such as organizations, people and
-places.</p>
-
-<p>A <strong>Core Vocabulary</strong>, of which the Legal Entity vocabulary is an example,
-is a simplified, reusable, and extensible data model that
-captures the fundamental characteristics of an entity in a context-neutral fashion [[CV1]].
-Well known examples of existing Core Vocabularies include the Dublin Core Metadata Set [[DC11]].
-Such Core Vocabularies are the starting point for agreeing on new semantic interoperability
-assets and defining mappings between existing assets. Semantic interoperability assets that map
-to or extend such Core Vocabularies are the minimum required to guarantee a level of cross-domain
-and cross-border interoperability that can be attained by public administrations.</p>
-
-</section> <!-- Terminology -->
-
<section class="informative">
<h2 id="example">Example of Use</h2>
-<p>The following is an example of a (real) company described using the Legal Entity vocabulary (in RDF/Turtle). This includes:</p></ul>
-<li>a description of the legal entity ;</li>
-<li>a legal identifier (i.e. details of the registration with the authority that conferred legal status) ;</li>
-<li>a further identifier (Open Corporates) .</li></ul>
+<p>The following is an example of a (real) company described using the Registered Organization vocabulary (in RDF/Turtle). This includes:</p></ul>
+<li>a description of the organization;</li>
+<li>a legal identifier (i.e. details of the registration with the authority that conferred legal status);</li>
+<li>a further identifier (Open Corporates).</li></ul>
-<p>We assume here that example.com is publishing information about legal entities. This might be the
+<p>We assume here that example.com is publishing information about registered organizations. This might be the
company register itself or another organization.</p>
<pre id="appleBinding">
1 <http://data.companieshouse.gov.uk/id/company/04285910>
-2 a legal-entity:LegalEntity ;
-3 legal-entity:legalName "Apple Binding Ltd" ;
-4 legal-entity:companyStatus <http://example.com/ref/status/NormalActivity> ;
-5 legal-entity:companyType <http://example.com/ref/type/Plc> ;
-6 legal-entity:companyActivity <http://example.com/ref/NACE/2/C/18/01/02> ;
-7 legal-entity:companyActivity <http://example.com/ref/NACE/2/C/18/01/04> ;
+2 a rov:RegOrg ;
+3 rov:legalName "Apple Binding Ltd" ;
+4 rov:companyStatus <http://example.com/ref/status/NormalActivity> ;
+5 rov:companyType <http://example.com/ref/type/Plc> ;
+6 rov:companyActivity <http://example.com/ref/NACE/2/C/18/01/02> ;
+7 rov:companyActivity <http://example.com/ref/NACE/2/C/18/01/04> ;
8 # Note the use of legalIdentifier on the next line
-9 legal-entity:legalIdentifier <http://example.com/id/li04285910> ;
+9 rov:registration <http://example.com/id/li04285910> ;
10 # Other identifiers are often very useful but they do
11 # not confer legal entity status.
-12 legal-entity:identifier <http://example.com/id/oc04285910> ;
-13 legal-entity:registeredAddress <http://example.com/id/ra04285910> .
+12 rov:identifier <http://example.com/id/oc04285910> ;
+13 rov:registeredAddress <http://example.com/id/ra04285910> .
14 # The actual registration
15 <http://example.com/id/li04285910> a adms:Identifier ;
-16 skos:notation "04285910" ;
+16 skos:notation "04285910"^^ex:idType ;
17 adms:schemaAgency "UK Companies House" ;
18 dcterms:created "2001-09-12"^^xsd:date .
19 # A supplementary identifier (Open Corporates)
20 <http://example.com/id/oc04285910> a adms:Identifier ;
-21 skos:notation "http://opencorporates.com/companies/gb/04285910" ;
+21 skos:notation "http://opencorporates.com/companies/gb/04285910"^^ex:OCid ;
22 dcterms:created "2010-10-21T15:09:59Z"^^xsd:dateTime ;
23 dcterms:modified "2012-04-26T15:16:44Z"^^xsd:dateTime ;
24 dcterms:creator <http://opencorporates.com/companies/gb/07444723> .
@@ -240,13 +244,14 @@
The UN's ISIC Codes [[ISIC4]] form a common starting point for several such vocabularies including
the European Union's NACE [[NACE]] Codes and UK's SIC codes [[SIC07]].</p>
-<p>Line 9 carries the crucial <code><a href="#legalIdentifer">legalIdentifier</a></code> property that points to an
+<p>Line 9 carries the crucial <code><a href="#registration">registration</a></code> property that points to an
Identifier class (defined in <abbr title="Asset Description Metadata Schema">ADMS</abbr> [[ADMS]]).
-Although formally the Legal Entity vocabulary has no mandatory
-classes or properties, the defining characteristic of a legal entity is that it is formally registered.
+Although formally the Registered Organization vocabulary has no mandatory
+classes or properties, the defining characteristic of a registered organization is that it is formally registered.
This is the property that captures that information and links to the formal registration which is described
-in lines 15 - 18. In this case, Apple Binding became a legal entity on 12 September 2001 when
-UK Companies House issued it with the identifier 04285910. Incidentally, Companies House
+in lines 15 - 18. In this case, Apple Binding became a registered company on 12 September 2001 when
+UK Companies House issued it with the identifier 04285910. The identifier is typed in line with expected
+practice for <code>skos:notation</code> and the ORG ontology. Incidentally, UK Companies House
publishes its information about registered companies as linked data and the example uses that URI
as the subject of the description.</p>
@@ -261,32 +266,43 @@
<h2 id="conceptualmodel">The Conceptual Model</h2>
<figure id="uml">
- <img src="BusinessCVdiagram.png" width="729" height="247" alt="UML Diagram of the Legal Entity vocabulary" />
- <figcaption>UML Diagram of the Legal Entity vocabulary</figcaption>
+ <img src="BusinessCVdiagram.png" width="729" height="247" alt="UML Diagram of the Registered Organization vocabulary" />
+ <figcaption>UML Diagram of the Registered Organization vocabulary</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The classes and properties are described in the following sub-sections.</p>
+
+<section><h2 id="dataTypes">Data Types</h2>
+<p>The Registered Organization vocabulary makes use of the following abstract data types, all of which are
+defined in the ADMS specification [[ADMS]].</p>
+<ul>
+ <li>Text</li>
+ <li>Code</li>
+ <li>Identifier</li>
+</ul>
+</section>
+
<section>
-<h3 id="LegalEntity">The Legal Entity Class</h3>
-<p><code>legal-entity:LegalEntity</code> is the key class for the Legal Entity vocabulary and represents a business that is
+<h3 id="LegalEntity">The Registered Organization Class</h3>
+<p><code>rov:RegOrg</code> is the key class for the Registered Organization vocabulary and represents an organization that is
legally registered. In many countries there is a single registry although in others, such
-as Spain and Germany, multiple registries exist. A Legal Entity is able to trade, is
-legally liable for its actions, accounts, tax affairs etc.</p>
-<p>This makes legal entities distinct from the concept of organizations, groups or, in some jurisdictions, sole traders.
+as Spain and Germany, multiple registries exist. A Registered Organization is able to trade, is
+legally liable for its actions, accounts, tax affairs etc. Legal entity status is conferred by the act of registration cf.
+<code>org:FormalOrganization</code> that applies to any legal entity, including those created by other legal means. </p>
+<p>This makes registered organizations distinct from the broader concept of organizations, groups or, in some jurisdictions, sole traders.
Many organizations exist that are not legal entities yet to the outside world they have staff, hierarchies,
locations etc. Other organizations exist that are an umbrella for several legal entities (universities
-are often good examples of this). This vocabulary is concerned solely with registered legal
-entities and does not attempt to cover all possible trading bodies.</p>
-<p>In RDF, Legal Entity is a sub class of the Organization Ontology's <code>org:FormalOrganization</code>
+are often good examples of this). This vocabulary is concerned solely with registered organizations.</p>
+<p>In RDF, Registered Organization is a sub class of the Organization Ontology's <code>org:FormalOrganization</code>
which is itself a sub class of the more general 'Agent' class found in FOAF [[FOAF]] and Dublin Core [[DC11]] that
-<em>does</em> encompass organizations, natural persons, groups etc. - i.e. an Agent is
+<em>does</em> encompass organizations, natural persons, groups etc. &emdash; i.e. an Agent is
any entity that is able to carry out actions.</p>
</section>
<section>
<h3 id="legalName">legal name</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">legalName</td><td>Text</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">legal name</td><td>Text</td><td><code>rov:legalName</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>The legal name of the business. A business might have more than one legal name,
particularly in countries with more than one official language. In such cases, and where
@@ -296,8 +312,8 @@
<h3 id="alternativeName">alternative name</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">alternativeName</td><td>Text</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">alternative name</td><td>Text</td><td><code>dcterms:alternative</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>Some jurisdictions recognize concepts such as a trading name or alternative forms of a
legal entity's name. The alternative name property can be used to record such names but
@@ -311,8 +327,8 @@
<section>
<h3 id="companyType">company type</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">companyType</td><td>Code</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">company type</td><td>Code</td><td><code>rov:companyType</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>This property records the type of company. Familiar types are SA, PLC, LLC,
GmbH etc. At the time of publication, there is no agreed set of company types that
@@ -320,14 +336,13 @@
mean slightly different things. The UK's LLP and Greece's EPE provide further example of
close, but not exact, matches.</p>
<p>That said, each jurisdiction will have a limited set of recognized company types and these
-should be used in a consistent manner. See section @@@ for guidance on using controlled vocabularies.</p>
-
+should be used in a consistent manner.</p>
</section>
<section>
<h3 id="companyStatus">company status</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">companyStatus</td><td>Code</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">company status</td><td>Code</td><td><code>rov:companyStatus</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>Recording the status of a company presents the same issues as its type.
The terms 'insolvent', 'bankrupt' and 'in receivership,' for example, are likely to mean
@@ -338,56 +353,64 @@
does appear to have cross-border usefulness and this should be used in preference to
terms like 'trading' or 'operating.'</p>
<p>Best Practice for recording various other status levels is to use the relevant jurisdiction's
-terms and to identify the controlled vocabulary used. See section @@@ for guidance on using controlled vocabularies.</p>
+terms and to identify the controlled vocabulary used.</p>
</section>
<section>
<h3 id="companyActivity">company activity</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">companyActivity</td><td>Code</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">company activity</td><td>Code</td><td><code>rov:companyActivity</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>The activity of a company should be recorded using a controlled vocabulary. Several
such vocabularies exist, many of which map to the UN's ISIC codes [[ISIC4]]. Where a particular controlled
vocabulary is in use within a given context, such as SIC codes in the UK, it is acceptable to use
-these, however, the preferred choice for European interoperability is NACE [[NACE]].
-Again, section @@@ offers guidance on using controlled vocabularies.</p>
+these, however, the preferred choice for European interoperability is NACE [[NACE]].</p>
</section>
<section>
-<h3 id="legalIdentifier">legal identifier</h3>
+<h3 id="registration">registration</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">legalIdentifier</td><td>Identifier</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">registration</td><td>Identifier</td><td><code>rov:registration</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
-<p>The legal status of a business is conferred on it by an authority within a given
-jurisdiction. The Legal Identifier is therefore a fundamental relationship between a legal
-entity and the authority with which it is registered. The details of the registration are
+<p>The legal status of a registered organization is conferred on it by an authority within a given
+jurisdiction. The registration is therefore a fundamental relationship between a the organization
+and the authority with which it is registered. The details of the registration are
provided as properties of the Identifier class which is defined by ADMS [[ADMS]]. The vocabulary
sets no restriction on the type of legal identifier. In many countries, the business
register's identifier is the relevant data point. The tax number often fulfils this function in Spain.</p>
-<p>Although there is no formal cardinality constraint on any property in the Legal Entity vocabulary, it is
-questionable whether a description of a legal entity without this property and an associated Identifier class
+<p>Although there is no formal cardinality constraint on any property in the Registered Organization vocabulary, it is
+questionable whether a description of a registered organization without this property and an associated Identifier class
will be of any value.</p>
-<p>In RDF terms, <code>legalIdentifier</code> is a sub property of identifier (see next section) with specific semantics.</p>
+<p>In RDF terms, <code>rov:registration</code> is a sub property of <code>rov:identifier</code> (see next section) with specific semantics.</p>
</section>
<section>
<h3 id="identifier">identifier</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">identifier</td><td>Identifier</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">identifier</td><td>Identifier</td><td><code>rov:identifier</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>The identifier property links a resource to any formally issued identifier for that
-resource other than the one that confers legal status upon it.</p>
+resource other than one that confers legal status upon it.</p>
<p>Legal Entities, people, organizations and other Agents may have any number of
-identifiers (but only one legal identifier). For example, in many jurisdictions,
+identifiers (but no more than one registration that confers legal entity status). For example, in many jurisdictions,
a business will have one or more tax numbers associated with them which do not, by themselves,
confer legal entity status. An individual may be issued with identifiers for everything from
social security to club membership. The identifier relationship should not be used to
-link to the identifier issued by the authority that conferred legal entity status on a business.</p>
-<p>In RDF terms, the identifier property is not constrained by its domain so that any resource can be linked to an Identifier. This
-is in contrast to <code>dcterms:identifier</code> that specifies a domain of <code>rdfs:Literal</code>.</p>
+link to the identifier issued by the authority that conferred legal entity status on an organization.</p>
+
+<p>There are several vobcaularies in use with a property of 'identifier.' They vary according to their domains and ranges as shown in the following table.
+
+<table>
+ <tr><th>property</th><th>domain</th><th>range</th></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>rov:identifier</code></td><td>undefined</td><td><code>adms:Identifier</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>rov:registration</code></td><td><code>rov:RegOrg</code></td><td><code>adms:Identifier</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>org:identifier</code></td><td><code>org:Organization</code></td><td>formally none, but <code>org:identifier</code> is a sub property of <code>skos:notation</code> for which best practice is to provide a datatyped literal as the value.</code></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><code>dcterms:identifier</code></td><td>undefined</td><td><code>rdfs:literal</code></td></tr>
+</table>
+
</section>
<section>
@@ -399,8 +422,8 @@
class creates a dependency we may not wish to have.</p>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">registeredAddress</td><td>Address</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">registered address</td><td>Address</td><td><code>rov:registeredAddress</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
<p>In almost all jurisdictions, legal entities must register a postal address. This
may or may not be the actual address at which the legal entity does its business,
@@ -409,21 +432,22 @@
</section>
<section>
-<h3 id="legalEntity">legal entity</h3>
+<h3 id="legalEntity">registered organization</h3>
<table>
- <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th></tr></thead>
- <tbody><tr><td class="code">legalEntity</td><td>Legal Entity</td></tr></tbody>
+ <thead><tr><th>Property</th><th>Abstract Data Type</th><th>RDF encoding</th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody><tr><td class="code">registered organization</td><td>Registered Organization</td><td><code>rov:regOrg</code></td></tr></tbody>
</table>
-<p>The legal entity relationship can be used to link any resource to a Legal Entity Class.
-This is useful, for example, where an organization includes one or more legal entities. The Dublin Core
+<p>The registered organization relationship can be used to link any resource to a Registered Organization Class.
+This is useful, for example, where an organization includes one or more registered entities. The Dublin Core
term <code>dcterms:isPartOf</code> is a suitable inverse of this relationship. </p>
</section>
+
</section> <!-- Conceptual Model -->
<section>
<h2 id="ack">Acknowledgements</h2>
-<p>Significant contributions to the original work on the Legal Entity vocabulary were made by:
+<p>Significant contributions to the original work on the Registered Organization vocabulary were made by:
Ignacio Boixo,
Debora Di Giacomo,
Stijn Goedertier,