[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Recording the concepts of Party
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:firstname.lastname@example.org title:Managing Director tel;work:+45 36 95 33 58 tel;cell:+61 438 352228 url:www.documentengineeringservices.com version:2.1 end:vcard