atom feed23 messages in com.freebase.freebase-discussRe: [Freebase-discuss] countries, adm...
FromSent OnAttachments
glenn mcdonaldJul 19, 2010 4:30 pm 
Jason DouglasJul 19, 2010 5:55 pm 
glenn mcdonaldJul 19, 2010 8:06 pm 
Tom MorrisJul 19, 2010 9:52 pm 
Iain SproatJul 20, 2010 12:30 am 
Kirrily RobertJul 20, 2010 12:44 am 
Tom MorrisJul 20, 2010 12:51 am 
glenn mcdonaldJul 20, 2010 4:53 am 
Tom MorrisJul 20, 2010 5:34 am 
Philip KendallJul 20, 2010 5:37 am 
Christopher R. MadenJul 20, 2010 5:37 am 
Iain SproatJul 20, 2010 5:57 am 
glenn mcdonaldJul 20, 2010 6:53 am 
Philip KendallJul 20, 2010 7:01 am 
Paul HouleJul 20, 2010 7:34 am 
glenn mcdonaldJul 20, 2010 7:56 am 
Luke SchubertJul 20, 2010 7:58 am 
Shailesh KochharJul 21, 2010 12:08 am 
Paul HouleJul 21, 2010 8:03 am 
Tom MorrisJul 21, 2010 8:26 am 
evening0starJul 21, 2010 9:07 am 
Thad GuidryJul 21, 2010 10:15 am 
evening0starJul 21, 2010 10:30 am 
Subject:Re: [Freebase-discuss] countries, administrative divisions...
From:Christopher R. Maden (cri@maden.org)
Date:Jul 20, 2010 5:37:44 am
List:com.freebase.freebase-discuss

Kirrily Robert wrote:

On 20/07/2010, at 12:30 AM, Iain Sproat wrote:

Perhaps a "UN recognized country" type? (using the United Nations as the defining body to avoid disputes about whether, e.g. Taiwan is recognised)

I feel like that type, documented to be "currently recognised only", would be a (rare!) useful bucket type.

I like the idea, too.

Consider also, instead of or in addition to that, a property on Country for recognized-by; it could be the reciprocal of recognizes (also on Country, or on a new type like Diplomatic Entity), or could use a CVT for dates of recognition.

For example, the US didn’t recognize PR China until the 1970s; the US recognizes RO China, but PR China does not; the US recognized Bosnia-Herzegovina before Serbia did.

If a new Diplomatic Entity type is used, then the UN could be one of the recognizers; if not, it would only be other countries.

~Chris