Research relevant ontologies

[jmatsushita]

We probably need to identify relevant ontologies at a later stage (or should it be now?). @alangrafu @pudo

Is it good practice to simply start by publishing our own based on our current schema (written in Cypher for now) before starting to map/merge/link to existing ones?

Relevant existing ontologies that I could identify are:

• equity/control/executives,
• contracts, public contracts
• company attributes/industry

[elf-pavlik]

if you plant that openoil and https://opencorporates.com data can easily integrate it would make sense IMO to coordinate on that!

[pudo]

Some other, slightly random links:

• Open Contracting Data Standard
• OpenSecrets Industries, based off NAICS, related to NACE (Europe)
• Popolo for People/Organizations/Membership
• There's also a lot of financial taxonomies that might become relevant, check the XBRL Taxonomies, which are XML schema for things including standard SEC and UK accounting charts.

[jmatsushita]

@elf-pavlik Re: integration with OpenCorporates, we're already making sure that (when available) the opencorporate id is included as a property in our Company nodes.

There are other considerations regarding data harmonisation with OC, I've written a few (difficult to read) notes about the Open Corporates statement model which I think is a good approach (which might be a good fit for named graphs in semantic terms). @sebbacon told me that the statement approach wasn't yet used widely in OC yet.