Issue 180: Is a URL really a type of contact point?

Starting Date: 
2010-01-28
Working Group: 
3
Status: 
Done
Closing Date: 
2010-12-20
Background: 

Is www.cidoc.icom.org really an instance of E51 Contact Point?
If so, then the scope note for E51 Contact Point should certainly be reworded, as URLs do not serve to direct communications to an instance of E39 Actor, but from an instance of E39 Actor.

Patrick Le Boeuf

Helsinki 28/1/2010

Current Proposal: 

Since this logic is not central to E51, change example in P2:

from:

Examples:
"www.cidoc.icom.org" (E51) has type URL (E55)

to:

Examples:
"enquiries@cidoc-crm.org" (E51) has type e-mail address (E55)

and scope note of E51:

from:

This class comprises identifiers employed, or understood, by communication services to direct communications to an instance of E39 Actor. These include E-mail addresses, telephone numbers, post office boxes, Fax numbers, etc. Most postal addresses can be considered both as instances of E44 Place Appellation and E51 Contact Point. In such cases the subclass E45 Address should be used.

to:

This class comprises identifiers employed, or understood, by communication services to direct communications to an instance of E39 Actor. These include E-mail addresses, telephone numbers, post office boxes, Fax numbers, URLs etc. Most postal addresses can be considered both as instances of E44 Place Appellation and E51 Contact Point. In such cases the subclass E45 Address should be used. URLs are addresses used by machines to access another machine through an http request. Since the accessed machine acts on behalf of the E39 Actor providing the machine, URLs are considered as instances of E51 Contact Point to that E39 Actor.

Outcome: 

The proposal accepted, Nuremberg Dec 2010