The latest Tweets from The Organization (@ygorganization). We exist to end misinformation. An IT organization (information technology organization) is the department within a company that is charged with establishing, monitoring and maintaining information. Organization is a peer-reviewed journal whose principal aim is to foster dialogue and innovation in studies of organization. The Organization Ontology. Status of This Document. This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. A list of current W3. C publications and the. W3. C technical reports index at. TR/. This document has been reviewed by W3. C Members, by software developers, and by other W3. C groups and interested parties, and is endorsed by the Director as a W3. C Recommendation. It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited from another document. W3. C's role in making the Recommendation is to draw attention to the specification and to promote its widespread deployment. This enhances the functionality and interoperability of the Web. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent. Essential. Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with. W3. C Patent Policy. Overview of ontology. This section is non- normative. This ontology is designed to enable publication of information on. It is intended to provide a generic, reusable core. The ontology gives terms to support the representation of: This coverage corresponds to the type of information typically. As such it does not offer a. Different domains will have different. Instead the ontology. Users of. the ontology are encouraged to define profiles. All terms are within the. ORG namespace (http: //www. The namespaces for all referenced vocabularies are giving. Namespaces. Description and commentary. Organizational structure. This section is non- normative. The core class in the ontology. Organization which is. It. represents a collection of people organized together into a. She is the leader of an international organization devoted to the protection of natural resources. He has been working on the organization of his notes into an outline.
The group. has some common purpose or reason for existence which goes beyond the. An organization may itself be able to. We distinguish a particular sub- class of. Formal. Organization. Examples include a corporation, charity, government or. The ontology then supports the notion of organizations being. The. relations org: sub. Organization. Of. Sub. Organization. In some cases the sub- organization can be regarded as standalone - . In other cases it is useful to refer to departments or. IT department. which only have meaning within the context of the containing. The ontology supports that situation through a specialization. Organization. called org: Organizational. Unit. For. convenience it also provides the relations org: has. Unit. and org: unit. Of which are specializations. Note that the containment hierarchy is completely open. For. example, org: Formal. Organizations are free to contain. Formal. Organizations. Organizational hierarchy. In many organizations there is a hierarchy of unit structures. For example we might see a containment hierarchy like: Corporation. Such hierarchies are specific to the particular organization, or class of. Profiles of ORG may include. Organization and org: Organizational. Unit to. represent such structures and specialize or restrict the use. Sub. Organization to match the desired hierarchy. Organizational classification. In a number of circumstances we wish to classify organizations. There are many approaches that could be. It can be based on the legal structure under which the organization operates. To support the. latter the ontology supplies a. SKOS. . If the classification is not intrinsic to the organization. If the. classification is a reflection of the intrinsic nature of the. Experience with early versions of the. In some cases a very simple direct representation is preferred. In other cases a more complex. To represent. specific roles that the person plays, ORG profiles may define. Of. In particular, the notion. ORG provides a. built in property specialization of org: member. Of, namely. org: head. Of for this purpose. For example: < http: //example. Of < http: //example. This is supported. Role class. The situation of an Agent fulfilling that role within an organization. Membership n- ary relationship. This also. makes it possible to annotate the relationship with qualifying information such as duration, salary. For example: < http: //example. Formal. Organization. Label . The relationship between. Role resource and the corresponding property can be indicated through. Property annotation. Thus we might extend the above example with: eg: cto. Role a org: Role. Property eg: cto. Of. Posts enable. Posts can. report to other Posts. So a org: Post can exist without someone holding that. In contrast, a org: Membership represents the relationship between. Agent) and the organization and does not. Agent to partake of the relationship. While commonly a Post would be held by a single person there are. Post may itself be, or. Organization. There are no disjointness. ORG from treating an entity. Post and. an org: Organization simultaneously. A post can have an associated org: Role. Relationship between Posts and Memberships. In many situations only one of Post or Membership is needed, and ORG. In cases where the aim is to record. The. relations org: site. Of and org: has. Site establish links between a. Site and an organization. We distinguish a. Primary. Site). to indicate the default means by which an. Registered. Site). The ontology. provides org: site. Address to define. Card . In that case we need some. Such usage of PROV- O terms should take into account the. It is sometimes convenient to be able to directly link from an. This. is supported by using. Derived. From. relationship. ORG declares the property chain axiom: Sub. Object. Property. Of( Object. Property. Chain( org: resulted. From org: original. Organization ) prov: was. Derived. From ). Which can also be expressed using a SPARQL CONSTRUCTCONSTRUCT . Notes on modelling style. This section is non- normative. Use of inverses: designers differ on whether providing pairs of inverse relationships between. In this design we. This makes it easier to query. This does incur a cost in terms. Here we adopt the latter approach for those properties. Conformance. As well as sections marked as non- normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples. Everything else in this specification is. Additional. constraints in a profile may. ORG; controlled vocabularies or controlled sets of URIs to use as acceptable values for. Membership and Reporting.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2017
Categories |