--- a/org/index.html Thu Sep 06 18:12:40 2012 +0100
+++ b/org/index.html Sun Sep 30 21:29:08 2012 +0100
@@ -49,7 +49,10 @@
</section>
<section id="sotd">
-This ontology was originally developed <a href="http://www.epimorphics.com/public/vocabulary/org.html">and published</a> outside of W3C, but with this publication is now on the Recommendation Track, being further developed as necessary by the GLD Working Group.
+This ontology was originally
+ developed <a href="http://www.epimorphics.com/public/vocabulary/org.html">
+ and published</a> outside of W3C, but has been extended and further
+ developed within the Government Linked Data Working group.
</section>
<section class="introductory">
@@ -58,24 +61,60 @@
<p>
This document is aimed at assisting government IT managers, procurement officers, Web developers, vendors, and researchers who are interested in publishing open government data using W3C standards. The benefits of using international standards for data exchange is to significantly increase interoperability of data.
</p>
-<p>
-Readers of this document are expected to be familiar with delivery of content via the Web, and to have a general familiarity with the technologies involved, but are not required to have a background in semantic technologies or previous experience with Linked Data. Data stewards, curators, database administrators and other personnel involved in Open Government initiatives are encouraged to read this Linked Open Data Best Practices document.
</section>
<!-- INTRODUCTION -->
<section class="informative">
<h2>Introduction</h2>
-<p>This document does not prescribe any particular method of deploying data expressed in ORG. ORG is applicable in many contexts including RDF accessible via SPARQL endpoints, embedded in HTML pages as RDFa, or serialized as e.g. RDF/XML or Turtle. The examples in this document use Turtle simply because of Turtle's readability.</p>
+<p>This document describes a core ontology for organizational structures, aimed
+at supporting linked-data publishing of organizational information across
+a number of domains. It is designed to allow domain-specific extensions to add classification
+of organzations and roles, as well as extensions to support neighbouring information
+such as organizational activities.</p>
+
+<p>This document does not prescribe any particular method of deploying
+ data expressed in ORG. ORG is applicable in many contexts including
+ RDF accessible via SPARQL endpoints, embedded in HTML pages as RDFa,
+ or serialized as e.g. RDF/XML or Turtle. The examples in this
+ document use Turtle in the interests of readability.</p>
</section>
<section id="conformance">
+<p>A data interchange, however that interchange occurs, is conformant
+ with ORG if:
<ul>
-<li><i>ORG compliance</i> means that a provider uses a subset of the ORG vocabulary when publishing catalog and dataset metadata. This is likely to be the common case.</li>
-<li><i>ORG conformance</i> means that a provider uses the entire ORG vocabulary when publishing catalog and dataset metadata.</li>
+<li>it uses terms (classes and properties) from ORG in a way consistent with
+ their semantics as declared in this specification;</li>
+<li>it does <strong>not</strong> use terms from other vocabularies instead of ones defined
+ in this vocabulary that could reasonably be used.</li>
</ul>
+</p>
+
+<p>A conforming data interchange:
+<ul>
+<li><em class="rfc2119" title="may">may</em> include terms from other vocabularies;</li>
+<li><em class="rfc2119" title="may">may</em> use only a subset of ORG terms.</li>
+</ul>
+</p>
+
+<p>An <strong>ORG profile</strong> is a specification for data
+ interchange that adds additional constraints to ORG. Additional
+ constraints in a profile <em class="rfc2119" title="may">may</em>
+ include:
+<ul>
+<li>a minimum set of required terms;</li>
+<li>classes and properties for additional terms not covered in ORG;</li>
+<li>controlled vocabularies or URI sets as acceptable values for
+ properties;</li>
+<li>guidance on 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>
+
</section>
<!-- Namespaces -->
@@ -103,21 +142,23 @@
<!-- Overview of ontology -->
<section class="informative">
-<h3>Overview of ontology</h3>
+<h2>Overview of ontology</h2>
<p>This ontology was original motivated by a need to publish information
-relating to government organizational structure as part of the <em>data.gov.uk</em> initiative.
-We felt that the best approach was to develop a small, generic, reusable core
+relating to government organizational structure as part of
+ the <em>data.gov.uk</em> initiative.
+The approach adopted was to develop a small, generic, reusable core
ontology for organizational information and then let developers extend
and specialize it to particular domains. </p>
-<p>The ontology gives minimal basic terms to support representation of:</p>
+<p>The ontology gives minimal terms to support representation of:</p>
<ul>
<li>organizational structure
<ul>
<li>notion of an organization</li>
<li>decomposition into sub-organizations and units</li>
+ <li>posts within an organization</li>
<li>purpose of an organization</li>
</ul>
</li>
@@ -146,7 +187,10 @@
type, organization purpose or roles. Different domains will have different
requirements for classification of such concepts. Instead the ontology
provides just the core base concepts needed to allow extensions to add specific
-sub-class structures or classification schemes as required.
+sub-class structures or classification schemes as required. Users of
+ the ontology are encouraged to define <strong>profiles</strong>
+ which strengthen interoperability by specifying particular
+ controlled vocabularies to use for these concepts.
</p>
<img src="img/diagram.png" alt="Diagram dipicting core classes and relationships">
@@ -154,108 +198,38 @@
<h2 id="example">Example</h2>
-<p>This example provides a quick overview of how dcat might be used to an organization </p>
+<p>This example illustrates a small fragment of the organizational
+ structure of the UK Cabinet Office:</p>
-<p>@@@ TODO.jse: Actually provide an example @@@</p>
-<!--
-<p>First, the catalog description:
-</p>
-<pre> :catalog
- a dcat:Catalog ;
- dct:title "Imaginary catalog" ;
- rdfs:label "Imaginary catalog" ;
- foaf:homepage <<a href="http://example.org/catalog" class="external free" title="http://example.org/catalog" rel="nofollow">http://example.org/catalog</a>> ;
- dct:publisher :transparency-office ;
- dcat:themes :themes ;
- dct:language "en"^^xsd:language ;
- dcat:dataset :dataset/001 ;
- .
-</pre>
-<p>The publisher of the catalog has the relative URI :transparency-office. Further description of the publisher can be provided as in the following example:
-</p>
-<pre> :transparency-office
- a foaf:Agent ;
- rdfs:label "Transparency Office" ;
- .
-</pre>
-<p>The catalog classify its datasets according to a set of domains represented by the relative URI :themes. SKOS can be used to describe the domains used:
-</p>
-<pre> :themes
- a skos:ConceptScheme ;
- skos:prefLabel "A set of domains to classify documents" ;
- .
-</pre>
-<p>The catalog connect to each of its datasets via dcat:dataset. In the example above, an example dataset was mentioned with the relative URI :dataset/001. A possible description of it using dcat is shown below:
-</p>
-<pre> :dataset/001
- a dcat:Dataset ;
- dct:title "Imaginary dataset" ;
- dcat:keyword "accountability","transparency" ,"payments" ;
- dcat:theme :themes/accountability ;
- dct:issued "2011-12-05"^^xsd:date ;
- dct:updated "2011-12-05"^^xsd:date ;
- dct:publisher :agency/finance-ministry ;
- dct:accrualPeriodicity "every six months" ;
- dct:language "en"^^xsd:language ;
- dcat:Distribution :dataset/001/csv ;
- .
-</pre>
-<p>Notice that this dataset is classified under the domain represented by the relative URI :themes/accountability. This should be part of the domains set identified by the URI :themes that was used to describe the catalog domains. An example SKOS description
-</p>
-<pre> :themes/accountability
- a skos:Concept ;
- skos:inScheme :themes ;
- skos:prefLabel "Accountability" ;
- .
-</pre>
-<p>The dataset can be downloaded in CSV format via the distribution represented by :dataset/001/csv.
-</p>
-<pre> :dataset/001/csv
- a dcat:Distribution ;
- dcat:accessURL <<a href="http://www.example.org/files/001.csv" class="external free" title="http://www.example.org/files/001.csv" rel="nofollow">http://www.example.org/files/001.csv</a>> ;
- dct:title "CSV distribution of imaginary dataset 001" ;
- dct:format [
- a dct:IMT;
- rdf:value "text/csv";
- rdfs:label "CSV"
- ]
- .
-</pre>
-<p>Finally, if the catalog publisher decides to keep metadata describing its records (i.e. the records containing metadata describing the datasets) dcat:CatalogRecord can be used. For example, :dataset/001 was issued on 2011-12-05. however, its description on Imaginary Catalog was added on 2011-12-11. This can be represented by dcat:
-</p>
-<pre> :record/001
- a dcat:CatalogRecord ;
- foaf:primaryTopic :dataset/001 ;
- dct:issued "2011-12-11"^^xsd:date ;
- .
- :catalog
- dcat:record :record/001 ;
- .
-</pre>
-<a name="Encoding_of_property_values" id="Encoding_of_property_values"></a><h2> <span class="mw-headline"> Encoding of property values </span></h2>
-<ul><li> Values like "unknown" or "unspecified" should never be used, and if present in the original database should be filtered for publishing. Instead, the property should simply be omitted.
-</li><li> @@@ policy for using resources vs. literals
-</li></ul>
--->
-</section>
+<pre>
+<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co>
+ rdf:type org:Organization , central-government:Department;
+ skos:prefLabel "Cabinet Office" ;
+ org:hasUnit <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co/unit/cabinet-office-communications> .
+
+<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co/unit/cabinet-office-communications>
+ rdf:type org:OrganizationalUnit ;
+ skos:prefLabel "Cabinet Office Communications" ;
+ org:unitOf <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co> ;
+ org:hasPost <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co/post/246> .
-<section class="informative">
-<h3>Design notes</h3>
-
- <p>For background to the approach taken in developing the ontology see:
- <a href="http://www.epimorphics.com/web/category/category/developers/organization-ontology">blog notes</a></p>
+<http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co/post/246>
+ skos:prefLabel "Deputy Director, Deputy Prime Minister's Spokesperson/Head of Communications" .
+ org:postIn <http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/co/unit/cabinet-office-communications> ;
+ org:heldBy <#person161> .
+ </pre>
</section>
-
<section class="informative">
<h3>Notes on style</h3>
-<p><em>Use of inverses:</em> authorities differ on whether providing pairs of inverse relationships between
+<p><em>Use of inverses:</em> designers differ on whether providing pairs of inverse relationships between
concepts is good practice compared to declaring each relationship in just one direction. In this design we
provide inverses for most relations (omitting attribute-like relations). This makes it easier to query
the data in linked-data settings where a (non-symmetric) closed bounded description is often the
-default description of each resource. This does incur a cost in terms of storage or use of run-time inference.
+default description of each resource. This does incur a cost in terms
+ of storage of maintenance of those relationships.
Particular applications of the ontology may adopt a profile in which only certain directions are asserted in the
data and leave it up to clients to apply any inverseOf reasoning they require.</p>
@@ -273,7 +247,7 @@
<!-- Class Organization -->
<section>
-<h2 id="Class:_Organization">Class: Organization</h2>
+<h3 id="Class:_Organization">Class: Organization</h3>
<p>Represents a collection of people organized together into a
community or other social, commercial or political structure. The group
has some common purpose or reason for existence which goes beyond the
@@ -285,22 +259,24 @@
<tr><td class="prop">subClassOf:</td><td> <a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td> It is recommended
that SKOS lexical labels should be used to label the Organization. In
-particular <code>skos:prefLabel</code> for the primary (e.g. legally recognized name), <code>skos:altLabel</code> for alternative names (trading names, colloquial names) and <code>skos:notation</code> to denote codes from a code list. Alternative names: <em>Collective</em> <em>Body</em> <em>Org</em> <em>Group</em>.</td></tr>
-
-
+particular <code>skos:prefLabel</code> for the primary (e.g. legally
+ recognized name), <code>skos:altLabel</code> for alternative
+ names (trading names, colloquial names)
+ and <code>skos:notation</code> to denote codes from a code
+ list. Alternative names: <em>Collective</em>, <em>Body</em>, <em>Group</em>.</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<!-- Property subOrganizationOf -->
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_subOrganizationOf">Property: subOrganizationOf</h3>
-<p>Represents hierarchical containment of Organizations or Organizational Units; indicates an organization which is a sub-part or child of this organization.</p>
+<p>Represents hierarchical containment of Organizations or OrganizationalUnits; indicates an Organization which contains this Organization.</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#subOrganizationOf">org:subOrganizationOf</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr><td class="prop">Domain and Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td> Inverse of <code>org:hasSubOrganization</code>. Alternative names: subOrgOf.</td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td> Inverse of <code>org:hasSubOrganization</code>. </td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</section>
@@ -308,7 +284,9 @@
<!-- Property transitiveSubOrganizationOf -->
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_transitiveSubOrganizationOf">Property: transitiveSubOrganizationOf</h3>
-<p>Represents hierarchical containment of Organizations or Organizational Units; indicates an organization which is a sub-part or child of this organization.</p>
+<p>Represents hierarchical containment of Organizations or
+ OrganizationalUnits; indicates an Organization which contains this
+ Organization, directly or indirectly.</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#transitiveSubOrganizationOf">org:transitiveSubOrganizationOf</a></th></tr></thead>
@@ -323,13 +301,13 @@
<!-- Property hasSubOrganization -->
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_hasSubOrganization">Property: hasSubOrganization</h3>
-<p>Represents hierarchical containment of Organizations or OrganizationalUnits; indicates an Organization which contains this Organization.</p>
+<p>Represents hierarchical containment of Organizations or Organizational Units; indicates an organization which is a sub-part or child of this organization.</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasSubOrganization">org:hasSubOrganization</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr><td class="prop">Domain and Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td> Inverse of <code>org:subOrganizationOf</code>. Alternative names: hasSubOrg.</td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td> Inverse of <code>org:subOrganizationOf</code>.</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</section>
@@ -347,58 +325,20 @@
term or code list, ideally a <code>skos:Concept</code>. However, the
range is left open to allow for other types of descriptive schemes. It
is expected that specializations or application profiles of this
-vocabulary will constrain the range of the purpose. Alternative names: <em>remit</em> <em>responsibility</em> (esp. if applied to OrganizationalUnits such as Government Departments).</td></tr>
+vocabulary will constrain the range of the purpose. Alternative names: <em>remit</em>, <em>responsibility</em> (esp. if applied to OrganizationalUnits such as Government Departments).</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</section>
-<!-- Property hasUnit -->
-<section>
-<h3 id="Property:_hasUnit">Property: hasUnit</h3>
-<p>Indicates a unit which is part of this Organization, e.g. a Department within a larger FormalOrganization.</p>
-
-<table class="definition">
- <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasUnit">org:hasUnit</a></th></tr></thead>
- <tbody>
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#OrganizationalUnit">org:OrganizationalUnit</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasSubOrganization">org:hasSubOrganization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
- Inverse of <code>org:unitOf</code>.
-</td></tr>
- </tbody>
-</table>
-</section>
-
-<!-- Property unitOf -->
-<section>
-<h3 id="Property:_unitOf">Property: unitOf</h3>
-<p>Indicates an Organization of which this Unit is a part, e.g. a
-Department within a larger FormalOrganization.</p>
-
-<table class="definition">
- <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#unitOf">org:unitOf</a></th></tr></thead>
- <tbody>
-
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#OrganizationalUnit">org:OrganizationalUnit</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#subOrganizationOf">org:subOrganizationOf</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
- This is the inverse of <code>org:hasUnit</code>.
-</td></tr>
- </tbody>
-</table>
-</section>
<!-- Property classification -->
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_classification">Property: classification</h3>
<p>Indicates a classification for this Organization within some
-classification scheme.
-<p class="todo">@@TODO: Make clear what is the status of this property</p>
-This property is under discussion and may be revised or removed - in
-many cases organizations are best categorized by defining a sub-class
-hierarchy in an extension vocabulary.</p>
+classification scheme. </p>
+<p>Note that it also permissible for applications to define
+ sub-classes of <code>org:Organization</code> as means to represent
+ orgnanizational categories.</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#classification">org:classification</a></th></tr></thead>
@@ -486,22 +426,59 @@
<section>
<h2 id="Class:_OrganizationalUnit">Class: OrganizationalUnit</h2>
<p>
-An Organization such University Support Unit which is part of some
-larger FormalOrganization and only has full recognition within the
-context of that FormalOrganization, it is not a Legal Entity in its own
-right.
+An Organization such as a department or support unit which is part of some
+larger Organization and only has full recognition within the
+context of that Organization. In particular the unit would not be
+regarded as a legal entity in its own right.
</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF class:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#OrganizationalUnit">org:OrganizationalUnit</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr><td class="prop">subClassOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
-Units can be large and complex containing ot her Units and even
-FormalOrganizations. Alternative names: <em>OU</em> <em>Unit</em> <em>Department</em>
+Units can be large and complex containing other Units. Alternative names: <em>Department</em>
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
+<!-- Property hasUnit -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_hasUnit">Property: hasUnit</h3>
+<p>Indicates a unit which is part of this Organization, e.g. a Department within a larger FormalOrganization.</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasUnit">org:hasUnit</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#OrganizationalUnit">org:OrganizationalUnit</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasSubOrganization">org:hasSubOrganization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ Inverse of <code>org:unitOf</code>.
+</td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
+
+<!-- Property unitOf -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_unitOf">Property: unitOf</h3>
+<p>Indicates an Organization of which this Unit is a part, e.g. a
+Department within a larger FormalOrganization.</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#unitOf">org:unitOf</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#OrganizationalUnit">org:OrganizationalUnit</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#subOrganizationOf">org:subOrganizationOf</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ This is the inverse of <code>org:hasUnit</code>.
+</td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
+
</section> <!-- end of Class OrganizationalUnit-->
<section class="informative">
@@ -510,15 +487,11 @@
below <code>org:Organization</code> is not a full covering. There
can be <code>org:Organization</code>s which are in
neither <code>org:FormalOrganization</code>
- nor <code>org:OrganizationalUnit</code>. The distinction between
- an externally recognized organization and one which only has
- meaning in the context of a larger organization is a common one
- which we support to simplify the mapping to existing practice. Note
+ nor in <code>org:OrganizationalUnit</code>. Note also
that the containment hierarchy is completely open
- <code>org:FormalOrganization</code>s are free to contain
other <code>org:FormalOrganization</code>s (e.g. subsidiaries of
- large corporations). We invite feedback from users of the ontology as to
- whether this distinction useful in practice.</p>
+ large corporations).</p>
</section>
<section class="informative">
@@ -532,9 +505,11 @@
Function
</pre>
-<p>The intention is that this would be added in custom extensions since they are specific to the
-organization at hand. This can easily be done by subclassing <code>org:OrganizationalUnit</code>,
-specializing <code>org:hasSubOrganization</code> and/or using <code>owl:allValuesFrom</code> restrictions on the new subclasses.</p>
+<p>Such hierarchies are specific to the organization, or class of
+ organization being modelled. Profiles of ORG may include
+ sub-classes of <code>org:OrganizationalUnit</code> to
+ represent such structures and specialize or restrict the use
+ of <code>org:hasSubOrganization</code> to match the desired hierarchy.</p>
</section>
<section class="informative">
@@ -547,16 +522,21 @@
Alternatively organizations can be classified by the service they provide (e.g. Educational, Manufacturing, LegalService etc).</p>
<p>The core organization ontology is neutral with respect to such choices.
-It is anticipated that applications to particular domains will introduce
-subclasses of <code>org:Organization</code> to reflect the domain requirements. </p>
+It is anticipated that profiles will either introduce
+subclasses of <code>org:Organization</code> or define a classification
+ scheme to use with the <code>org:classification</code>
+ property. </p>
-<p>Note that the core supports labelling an organization according to some
-external classification scheme through use of the <code>org:classification</code> property.
-This is appropriate for cases where the labelling is not intrinsic to the organization
- and doesn't affect other aspects of the modelling.
- This is not always appropriate.
+<p>Which of these mechanisms to use depends on the nature of the
+ profile. If the classification is not intrinsic to the organization
+ but simply some way to group organizations, for example as part of a
+ directory, then <code>org:classification</code> should be used. If the
+ classification is a reflection of the intrinsic nature of the
+ organization and affects other properties then the sub-class
+ approach should be used.
For example, only Charities have CharityNumbers so it would be better to represent a
- Charity as a subClassOf FormalOrganization rather than via a taxonomic labelling.</p>
+ Charity as a subClassOf <code>org:FormalOrganization</code> rather
+ than via a taxonomic labelling.</p>
</section>
</section>
@@ -564,12 +544,233 @@
<!-- Reporting relationships and roles -->
<section>
-<h3>Reporting relationships and roles</h3>
+<h2>Membership, roles, posts and reporting</h2>
+<section class="informative">
+<h3>Discussion</h3>
+
+<p>ORG provides a number of ways to represent the relationship between
+ people and organizations, together with the internal reporting
+ structure of an organization. Experience with early versions of the
+ ontology demonstrated that there is no "one size that fits
+ all". In some cases a very simple direct representation is preferred
+ for ease of consumption. In other cases a more complex
+ representation is needed to capture the nuances of the situation.
+ An ORG profile may specify that a particular subset of these
+ mechanisms be used.</p>
+
+<h4>Direct membership relation</h4>
+
+<p>
+This simplest representation provided by ORG is to directly state that
+some individual (represented as a <code>foaf:Agent</code>) is <code>org:memberOf</code> of an organization. To represent
+specific roles that the person plays then ORG profiles may define
+sub-properties of <code>org:memberOf</code>. In particular, the notion
+of a leader or head of a organization is so common that ORG provides a
+built in property specialization of <code>org:memberOf</code>, namely
+<code>org:headOf</code> for this purpose.</p>
+
+<p>For example:</p>
+
+<pre class="code"><http://example.com/people#ceo>
+ org:headOf <http://example.com/org#id> .
+</pre>
+
+<h4>Membership n-ary relationship</h4>
+
+<p>However, in general it is advantageous to have an explicit
+ representation of the organizational role that the person fulfils (e.g.
+for publication of responsibilities associated with the role), this is supported
+by the <code>org:Role</code> class. The situation of an Agent fulfilling that role within an organization
+is then expressed through instances of the <code>org:Membership</code> n-ary relation. This also
+makes it possible to annotate the relationship with qualifying information such as duration, salary,
+reference to the employment contract and so forth.</p>
+
+<p>For example:</p>
+
+<pre class="code"><http://example.com/org#id> a org:FormalOrganization;
+ skos:prefLabel "Example Ltd" .
+
+eg:ctoRole a org:Role;
+ rdfs:label "CTO" .
+
+[] a org:Membership;
+ org:member <http://example.com/people#jo> ;
+ org:organization <http://example.com/org#id> ;
+ org:role eg:ctoRole;
+ org:memberDuring [a owlTime:Interval; owlTime:hasBeginning [
+ owlTime:inXSDDateTime "2009-11-01T09:00:00Z"^^xsd:dateTime]] .
+</pre>
+
+<p>Since this representation can be a little less convenient to query and
+explore via linked-data browsing tools the core allows both explicit roles and
+simple direct relations to be used simultaneously. The relationship between
+the Role resource and the corresponding property can be indicated through
+the <code>org:roleProperty</code> annotation. Thus we might extend the above example with:</p>
+
+<pre class="code">eg:ctoRole a org:Role;
+ org:roleProperty eg:ctoOf .
+
+eg:ctoOf a owl:ObjectProperty, rdf:Property ;
+ rdfs:label "CTO" ;
+ rdfs:subPropertyOf org:memberOf .
+
+<http://example.com/people#jo>
+ eg:ctoOf <http://example.com/org#id> .
+</pre>
+
+<p>In practice we antipate tool chains generating the <code>org:Membership</code> instances
+and a simple closure rule being used to add any corresponding
+ short-cut specializations of <code>org:memberOf</code>.</p>
+
+<h4>Posts</h4>
+
+<p>The third representation that is provided by ORG is that of
+ a <code>org:Post</code> which represents some position in the
+ organization that may or may not be currently filled. Posts enable
+ reporting structures and organization charts to be represented
+ independently of the individuals holding those posts. Posts can
+ report to other Posts.<p>
+
+<p>So a <code>org:Post</code> can exist without someone holding that
+ post. In contrast, a <code>org:Membership</code> represents the relationship between
+ a particular individual (Agent) and the organization and does not
+ exist unless there is an Agent to partake of the relationship.</p>
+
+<p>A <code>org:Post</code> is also defined as a sub-class
+ of <code>org:Organization</code> to allow for cases where a Post is
+ actually held by a group of people (whether as a timeshare, as a
+ team or as a formal group such as a committee). </p>
+
+<p>A post can have an associated <code>org:Role</code>.</p>
+
+<h4>Relationship between Posts and Membership</h4>
+
+<p>In many cases only one of Posts and Memberships is needed to model
+ the situation and ORG profiles may specify that use of one of
+ these is preferred. In cases where the structure of the organization is to be
+ given, independently of the people within that
+ structure then <code>org:Post</code> is the appropriate
+ representation to choose. In cases where the aim is to record
+ the people who make up the organization
+ then <code>org:Membership</code> is appropriate, especially if the
+ duration of the membership is to be represented.</p>
+
+<p>We can state a formal relationship between these
+ representations in the form of entailment rules. We express these
+ as a sequence of SPARQL Construct operations:</p>
+
+<pre class="code">
+CONSTRUCT {
+ ?agent org:memberOf ?org .
+} WHERE {
+ ?agent org:holds ?post .
+ ?post org:postIn ?org .
+}
+
+CONSTRUCT {
+ ?agent org:memberOf ?org .
+} WHERE {
+ [] a org:Membership;
+ org:member ?agent ;
+ org:organization ?org .
+}
+
+CONSTRUCT {
+ [] a org:Membership;
+ org:member ?agent ;
+ org:organization ?org;
+ org:role ?role .
+} WHERE {
+ ?agent org:holds ?post .
+ ?post org:postIn ?org .
+ ?post org:role ?role .
+}
+
+CONSTRUCT {
+ ?agent ?roleprop ?org .
+} WHERE {
+ [] a org:Membership;
+ org:member ?agent ;
+ org:organization ?org;
+ org:role ?role .
+ ?role org:roleProperty ?roleprop .
+}
+</pre>
+
+</section>
+
+<!-- Property memberOf -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_memberOf">Property: memberOf</h3>
+<p>
+ Indicates that a person is a member of the Organization with no
+ indication of the nature of that membership or the role
+ played. Note that the choice of property name is not meant to
+ limit the property to only formal membership arrangements, it
+ is also indended to cover related concepts such as
+ affilliation or other involvement in the
+ organization. Extensions can specialize this relationship to
+ indicate particular roles within the organization or more
+ nuanced relationships to the organization. Has an optional
+ inverse, <code>org:hasMember</code>.
+</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#memberOf">org:memberOf</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
+
+<!-- Property hasMember -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_hasMember">Property: hasMember</h3>
+<p>
+ Indicates a person who is a member of the subject Organization.
+Inverse of <code>org:memberOf</code>, see that property for further clarification.
+</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasMember">org:hasMember</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Equivalent property:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/member">foaf:member</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ Provided for compatibility with <code>foaf:member</code>.
+</td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
+
+<!-- Property headOf -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_headOf">Property: headOf</h3>
+<p>
+ Indicates that a person (or other agent) is the leader or formal
+head of the Organization.
+</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#headOf">org:headOf</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#memberOf">org:memberOf</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ This will normally mean that they are the root
+ of the <code>org:reportsTo</code> (acyclic) graph, though an organization may have more than one head.
+</td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
<!-- Class Membership -->
<section>
-<h2 id="Class:_Membership">Class: Membership</h2>
+<h3 id="Class:_Membership">Class: Membership</h3>
<p>
Indicates the nature of an Agent's membership of an organization.
</p>
@@ -613,7 +814,7 @@
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_organization">Property: organization</h3>
<p>
- Indicates Organization in which the Agent is a member.
+ Indicates the organization in which the Agent is a member.
</p>
<table class="definition">
@@ -630,14 +831,17 @@
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_role">Property: role</h3>
<p>
- Indicates the Role that the Agent plays in a Membership relationship with an Organization.
+ Indicates the Role that the Agent plays in a Membership
+ relationship with an Organization. Can also be used on
+ a <code>org:Post</code> to indicate the role than any holder
+ of the Post plays.
</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#role">org:role</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Membership">org:Membership</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><code>owl:unionOf</code>(<a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Membership">org:Membership</a> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a>)</td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Role">org:Role</a></td></tr>
</tbody>
@@ -693,9 +897,7 @@
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#remuneration">org:remuneration </a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
-
-
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Membership">org:Membership</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Role">org:Role</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
Typically this will be denoted using an existing representation scheme
such as <code>gr:PriceSpecification</code> but the range is left open to allow applications to specialize it (e.g. to remunerationInGBP).
@@ -736,7 +938,7 @@
<h3 id="Property:_roleProperty">Property: roleProperty</h3>
<p>
This is a metalevel property which is used to annotate an <code>org:Role</code> instance with a sub-property of <code>org:memberOf</code>
- that can be used to directly indicate the role for easy of query.
+ that can be used to directly indicate the role for ease of query.
</p>
<table class="definition">
@@ -747,9 +949,9 @@
<tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property">rdf:Property</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
The
-intended semantics is a Membership relation involving the Role implies
+intended semantics is that a Membership relation involving the Role implies
the existence of a direct property relationship through an inference
-rule of the form: <code>{ [] org:member ?p; org:organization ?o; org:role [org:roleProperty ?r] } -> {?p ?r ?o}</code>
+rule of the form: <code>{ [] org:member ?a; org:organization ?o; org:role [org:roleProperty ?r] } -> {?a ?r ?o}</code>
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
@@ -758,64 +960,115 @@
</section> <!-- end of Class Role-->
-<!-- Property hasMember -->
+<!-- Class Post -->
<section>
-<h3 id="Property:_hasMember">Property: hasMember</h3>
+<h2 id="Class:_Post">Class: Post</h2>
<p>
- Indicates a person who is a member of the subject Organization.
-Inverse of <code>org:memberOf</code>, see that property for further clarification.
+A Post represents some position within an organization that
+ exists independently of the person or persons filling it. Posts
+ may be used to represent situations where a person is a member
+ of an organization ex officio (for example the Secretary of
+ State for Scotland is part of UK Cabinet by virtue of being
+ Secretary of State for Scotland, not as an individual person). A
+ post can be held by multiple people and hence can be treated as
+ a organization in its own right.
</p>
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF class:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">subClassOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+</tbody>
+</table>
+
+<!-- Property holds -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_holds">Property: holds</h3>
+<p>Indicates a Post held by some Agent.</p>
<table class="definition">
- <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasMember">org:hasMember</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#holds">org:holds</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Equivalent property:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/member">foaf:member</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
- Provided for compatibility with <code>foaf:member</code>.
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td> <a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#memberOf">org:memberOf</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ Inverse of <code>org:heldBy</code></code>.
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</section>
-<!-- Property memberOf -->
+<!-- Property heldBy -->
<section>
-<h3 id="Property:_memberOf">Property: memberOf</h3>
-<p>
- Indicates that a person is a member of the Organization with no
- indication of the nature of that membership or the role
- played. Note that the choice of property name is not meant to
- limit the property to only formal membership arrangements, it
- is also indended to cover related concepts such as
- affilliation or other involvement in the
- organization. Extensions can specialize this relationship to
- indicate particular roles within the organization or more
- nuanced relationships to the organization. Has an optional
- inverse, <code>org:hasmember</code>.
-</p>
+<h3 id="Property:_heldBy">Property: heldBy</h3>
+<p>Indicates an Agent which holds a Post.</p>
<table class="definition">
- <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#memberOf">org:memberOf</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#heldBy">org:heldBy</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td> <a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td> <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasMember">org:hasMember</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ Inverse of <code>org:holds</code></code>.
+</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</section>
+<!-- Property postIn -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_postIn">Property: postIn</h3>
+<p>Indicates the Organization in which the Post exists.</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#postIn">org:postIn</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ Inverse of <code>org:hasPost</code></code>.
+</td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
+
+<!-- Property hasPost -->
+<section>
+<h3 id="Property:_hasPost">Property: hasPost</h3>
+<p>Indicates a Post which exists within the Organization.</p>
+
+<table class="definition">
+ <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasPost">org:hasPost</a></th></tr></thead>
+ <tbody>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
+ Inverse of <code>org:postIn</code></code>.
+</td></tr>
+ </tbody>
+</table>
+</section>
+
+</section> <!-- end of Class Post -->
+
<!-- Property reportsTo -->
<section>
<h3 id="Property:_reportsTo">Property: reportsTo</h3>
<p>
Indicates a reporting relationship as might be depicted on an
-organizational chart.
+organizational chart. I can be used to indicate a reporting
+ relationship directly between Agents or between Posts that
+ Agents could hold
</p>
<table class="definition">
<thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#reportsTo">org:reportsTo</a></th></tr></thead>
<tbody>
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain and range:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><code>owl:unionOf</code>(<a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a>
+ <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a>) </td></tr>
+ <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><code>owl:unionOf</code>(<a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a>
+ <a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Post">org:Post</a>) </td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
The precise semantics of the reporting
relationship will vary by organization but is intended to encompass both
@@ -828,80 +1081,7 @@
</section>
-<!-- Property headOf -->
-<section>
-<h3 id="Property:_headOf">Property: headOf</h3>
-<p>
- Indicates that a person (or other agent) is the leader or formal
-head of the Organization.
-</p>
-
-<table class="definition">
- <thead><tr><th>RDF Property:</th><th><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#headOf">org:headOf</a></th></tr></thead>
- <tbody>
- <tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent">foaf:Agent</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#memberOf">org:memberOf</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
- This will normally mean that they are the root
- of the <code>org:reportsTo</code> (acyclic) graph, though an organization may have more than one head.
-</td></tr>
- </tbody>
-</table>
-</section>
-
-<section class="informative">
-<h3>Discussion</h3>
-
-<p>In some applications then it is sufficient to represent the role of an individual
-within an Organization by specializations of <code>org:memberOf</code>, as in the
-builtin example <code>org:headOf</code>.</p>
-
-<p>However, in general it is advantageous to have an explicit representation of the organizational role (e.g.
-to enable advertising of a post or for publication of salary ranges associated with the role), this is supported
-by the <code>org:Role</code> class. The situation of an Agent fulfilling that role within an organization
-is then expressed through instances of the <code>org:Membership</code> n-ary relation. This also
-makes it possible to annotate the relationship with qualifying information such as duration, salary,
-reference to the employment contract and so forth.</p>
-
-<p>For example:</p>
-
-<pre class="code"><http://example.com/org#id> a org:FormalOrganization;
- skos:prefLabel "Example Ltd" .
-
-eg:ctoRole a org:Role;
- rdfs:label "CTO" .
-
-[] a org:Membership;
- org:member <http://example.com/people#jo> ;
- org:organization <http://example.com/org#id> ;
- org:role eg:ctoRole;
- org:memberDuring [a owlTime:Interval; owlTime:hasBeginning [
- owlTime:inXSDDateTime "2009-11-01T09:00:00Z"^^xsd:dateTime]] .
-</pre>
-
-<p>Since this representation can be a little less convenient to query and
-explore via linked-data browsing tools the core allows both explicit roles and
-simple direct relations to be used simultaneously. The relationship between
-the Role resource and the corresponding property can be indicated through
-the <code>org:roleProperty</code> annotation. Thus we might extend the above example with:</p>
-
-<pre class="code">eg:ctoRole a org:Role;
- org:roleProperty eg:ctoOf .
-
-eg:ctoOf a owl:ObjectProperty, rdf:Property ;
- rdfs:label "CTO" ;
- rdfs:subPropertyOf org:memberOf .
-
-<http://example.com/people#jo>
- eg:ctoOf <http://example.com/org#id> .
-</pre>
-
-<p>In practice we antipate tool chains generating the <code>org:Membership</code> instances
-and a simple closure rule being used to add any corresponding short-cut specializations of <code>org:memberOf</code>.</p>
-</section>
-
-</section>
+</section> <!-- end of Membership, roles, posts and reporting -->
<!-- LOCATION -->
@@ -1044,7 +1224,6 @@
<tr><td class="prop">Domain:</td><td><a href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person">foaf:Person</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Range:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Site">org:Site</a></td></tr>
- <tr><td class="prop">subPropertyOf:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#hasPrimarySite">org:hasPrimarySite</a></td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</section>
@@ -1090,7 +1269,7 @@
<tbody>
<tr><td class="prop">subClassOf:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#Organization">org:Organization</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
- All members are <code>org:Organization</code>s rather than individuals and those Organizations can play particular roles within the venture. Alternative names: <em>Project</em> <em>Venture</em> <em>Endeavour</em> <em>Consortium</em>
+ All members are <code>org:Organization</code>s rather than individuals and those Organizations can play particular roles within the venture. Alternative names: <em>Project</em>, <em>Venture</em>, <em>Endeavour</em>, <em>Consortium</em>
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
@@ -1108,7 +1287,7 @@
When Organizations change substantially (not simply a change of personnel or internal structure,
for example a merger to create a new organization) then the new Organization
will typically be denoted by a new URI and we need some vocabulary to describe that change over time
-and the relationship between the original and resulting resouces.
+and the relationship between the original and resulting resources.
The Event mechanism here gives a generic hook for this, building upon the
<a href="http://open-biomed.sourceforge.net/opmv/ns">OPMV Provenance Vocabulary</a>.</p>
@@ -1129,8 +1308,8 @@
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
Extension vocabularies should define sub-classes of this
to denote particular categories of event. The instant or interval at
-which the event occurred should be given by `opmv:wasGeneratedAt`, a
-description should be given by `dct:description`.
+which the event occurred should be given by <code>opmv:wasGeneratedAt</code>, a
+description should be given by <code>dct:description</code>.
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
@@ -1153,8 +1332,8 @@
<tr><td class="prop">inverseOf:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#changedBy">org:changedBy</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
Note that in
-specializing the OPMV vocabulary we are treating an `org:Organization`
-as an `opmv:Artifact`, which is consistent with the OPM model.
+specializing the OPMV vocabulary we are treating an <code>org:Organization</code>
+as an <code>opmv:Artifact</code>, which is consistent with the OPM model.
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
@@ -1203,8 +1382,8 @@
<tr><td class="prop">inverseOf:</td><td><a href="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#resultingOrganization">org:resultingOrganization</a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="prop">Usage note:</td><td>
Note that in
-specializing the OPMV vocabulary we are treating an `org:Organization`
-as an `opmv:Artifact`, which is consistent with the OPM model.
+specializing the OPMV vocabulary we are treating an <code>org:Organization</code>
+as an <code>opmv:Artifact</code>, which is consistent with the OPM model.
</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>
@@ -1240,8 +1419,14 @@
<p>Changes since <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-vocab-org-20120405/">W3C Working Draft 05 April 2012</a>:
<ul>
+ <li>Added <code>org:Post</code> and associated properties.</li>
+ <li>Corrected description of <code>org:hasSubOrganiation</code>
+ and <code>org:subOrganizationOf</code>.</li>
+ <li>Corrected domain of <code>org:remuneration</code> to match ontology.</li>
<li>Corrected domain/range of <code>org:hasMember</code> to match ontology.</li>
- <li>Added misssing entry for <code>org:memberOf</code> to match ontology.</li>
+ <li>Added misssing entry for <code>org:memberOf</code> to match
+ ontology.</li>
+ <li>Rephrasing and reordering throughout the document to improve clarity.</li>
</ul>
@@ -1276,9 +1461,6 @@
</section>
<section class="appendix">
<h2>Acknowledgments</h2>
-<p>
-The editors are very thankful for comments and suggestions ...
-</p>
<p>This ontology was originally developed as part of the UK Linked Data Kernel project
under the leadership and guidance of John Sheridan (The National Archives).
Jeni Tennison provided immensely useful feedback and suggestions on the first draft,
@@ -1287,6 +1469,14 @@
<a href="http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/ontology/organisation.owl">Gazette Organization ontology</a>
and <a href="http://proton.semanticweb.org/">Proton-top</a>.
</p>
+<p>
+The editor gratefully acknowledges comments and support from the
+Government Linked Data Working group - particularly to Daniel Vila for
+transcribing the original documentation into W3C format and to Bart
+van Leeuwen for feedback and discussions that resulted in the addition
+of <code>org:Post</code>. The modelling of <code>org:Post</code> is
+closely based on the work of Jeni Tennison on modelling UK Government.
+</p>
</section>
</body>