<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=398154800-07032008><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I think the idea behind the proposed "volunteers" property
is for unpaid staff/officers, rather than for people who show up to fold
newsletters or staff tables or whatnot, since we're talking about replacing the
property "key people". In my opinion, the fact that Joe sometimes volunteers for
the Sierra Club, in addition to the fact that he is a member is not that
interesting. But that he's the secretary of his local chapter, for which he
receives no pay, is of more interest. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=398154800-07032008><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=398154800-07032008><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>The question for me is, does the property "employees and
other personnel" (on the type "employer") sufficiently address unpaid staff
positions/officers? The correllary is whether the type "employer" makes sense as
a co-type on organizations that have no paid staff.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=398154800-07032008><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=398154800-07032008><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Jeff</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> data-modeling-bounces@freebase.com
[mailto:data-modeling-bounces@freebase.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Ed
Laurent<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:04 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
Freebase data modeling mailing list<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Data-modeling]
Proposed changes to the/organization/organization type<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>My two cents is to have 3 properties: members, employees and
volunteers. <BR><BR>For example, Joe Smith might be an employee of The Nature
Conservancy, a paying member of the Union of Concerned Scientists and Sierra
Club, and he volunteers sometimes for Sierra Club activities. The 3 properties
would permit the storage of all this data in a simple way. <BR><BR>"Key
person" is more of a subjective call depending on the purpose for using the
data. Some users might think volunteers are key people when looking for future
volunteers. Other users might think employees and members are key people
because they involve money going in and out of the organization.<BR><BR>A
reciprocating "Volunteer" property added to the "Person" type sounds like a
good thing to me.<BR><BR>-Ed<BR><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Bryan Cheung <<A
href="mailto:bryan.cheung@metaweb.com">bryan.cheung@metaweb.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<DIV class=Ih2E3d>> 2. One of the designers of the organization type
originally created<BR>> the property key_people, and later decided this
was a bad idea and hid<BR>> the property. This property has been
hidden for quite some time, but<BR>> there still exists some data that
should be migrated.<BR>><BR>> The existing data should be migrated to
/business/employer/employee<BR>> (employer is an included type) and the
hidden property should be<BR>> deleted.<BR><BR><BR></DIV>I'd like to to
solicit feedback from the data-modeling gurus out there<BR>about this
migration. Organizations can have paid employees,<BR>volunteers or a
combination of both. While I believe the reasoning<BR>for getting rid
of the ambiguous property "key person" is still valid,<BR>do people think
the property "employees and other personnel" on the<BR>employer type
is sufficient in capturing a "key person" who is a<BR>volunteer? An
alternative would be to have a volunteer property (on<BR>employer or
organization type); however, this might be complicating<BR>because the
reciprocating property would either have to be on the type<BR>person or a
new type like "volunteer".<BR><BR>Suggestions?<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR><FONT
color=#888888>Bryan<BR></FONT>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Wj3C7c><BR><BR>On Mar 5, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Bryan Cheung
wrote:<BR><BR>> A couple of changes have been proposed for the
/organization/<BR>> organization type:<BR>><BR>> 1. A user has
requested that we add time span as a disambiguated<BR>> property on
organization member.<BR>><BR>> <A
href="http://www.freebase.com/view/discuss/organization/organization_member#%2Fguid%2F9202a8c04000641f8000000006fe1430"
target=_blank>http://www.freebase.com/view/discuss/organization/organization_member#%2Fguid%2F9202a8c04000641f8000000006fe1430</A><BR>><BR>>
I think it's a good idea to know when people were members of an<BR>>
organization; however, the relationship between an organization
member<BR>> and an organization is a simple one, and we would have to
insert a CVT<BR>> to represent the timespan-member
relationship.<BR>><BR>> 2. One of the designers of the organization
type originally created<BR>> the property key_people, and later decided
this was a bad idea and hid<BR>> the property. This property has
been hidden for quite some time, but<BR>> there still exists some data
that should be migrated.<BR>><BR>> The existing data should be
migrated to /business/employer/employee<BR>> (employer is an included
type) and the hidden property should be<BR>> deleted.<BR>><BR>>
Does anyone disagree with this changes? Are the applications
being<BR>> developed that will break due to these
changes?<BR>><BR>> Thanks,<BR>> Bryan<BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> Data-modeling
mailing list<BR>> <A
href="mailto:Data-modeling@freebase.com">Data-modeling@freebase.com</A><BR>>
<A href="http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling"
target=_blank>http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling</A><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Data-modeling
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:Data-modeling@freebase.com">Data-modeling@freebase.com</A><BR><A
href="http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling"
target=_blank>http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling</A><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>