Recording the concepts of Party

[Tim McGrath <tim.mcgrath@documentengineeringservices.com>]

Peter Borresen and I spent some time discussing the terminology used to 
describe Parties and have come up with something we think should be 
'good practice' in reusing the Party ABIE.

There are three flavours to describing the Party:

1. the ROLE
For example, a buyer or seller is a role played in a business process.  
We implement these by association (with extension if required) to Party.

2. the ACTOR
For example, a Customs Broker is acting as the Importer, the Factoring 
agent is acting as the Invoicer.  They represent the Party playing a 
role. We implement these by recursive association to Party (or the ABIE 
that extended the Party).

3. the TYPE
For example, Party XYZ is a government agency, port authority, 
certification authority, a commercial organization, an industry group, 
etc.. etc...  These types can be denoted by some form of classification 
system (such as NAIC in the US).  There may be a relationship between 
Type and Role/Actor but there may not be.  We are proposing a new BBIE, 
something like Industry Classification Code in Party to describe this.

Does anyone see a problem with this?


begin:vcard
fn:Tim McGrath
n:McGrath;Tim
org:Document Engineering Services Ltd.
email;internet:tim.mcgrath@documentengineeringservices.com
title:Managing Director
tel;work:+45 36 95 33 58
tel;cell:+61 438 352228
url:www.documentengineeringservices.com
version:2.1
end:vcard