Robert O'Rourke wrote:
> Martin McEvoy wrote:
>>
>>
>> Manu explained the differences quite nicley to
me..
>>
>> A role is "what you do", where a title is
"what your
>> official title is at the organization".
>>
I concur. I would add that title has a social function that
role does
not have.
A title is inherently something issued by an entity (author,
organization, etc.) to another entity (work of art,
employee) "because
it can", i.e. because the author owned that right b/c
he created the art
work, or the organization owned that right b/c it offered
the job. It
typically follows social codes known to the
organization/community where
it will be used. In the case of a title issued by a U.S.
business
organization, it uses the "VP of ...", "SVP
of ...", "director", etc. to
communicates clearly the rights/responsibilities/roles of
the person
within the organization.
In other words, a title plays a social role in an
organization/society.
As a result, titles are more important in large, stratified
organizations/societies.
A role/occupation does not play such a role. It merely
describes.
Of course the two are related: you would not give someone a
role and
give them an unrelated title.
In the context of a band, I'd say that a band does not
really fit the
profile of that stratified, large organization, and the
notion of title
is not really relevant in this context.
It may be though in the case of a record company.
Guillaume
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
|
