Hi there, I have a few initial questions for the changes proposed to update the specifications for the legalName and adding the alternateName array to the json format of the BUSINESS_SUMMARY_FILING_HISTORY.
Will the pdf version of the filing history also change to reflect these updates?
Is there a maximum length for the legalName field?
I don’t know if it’s possible to have parties other than the partners listed on the Business Summary - assuming it is, will only those entities with a roleType of Partner be listed in the LegalName?
Will the number of alternateNames entries with alternateNames.identifier the same as the business.identifier be exactly 1, for all scenarios?
Will the pdf version of the filing history also change to reflect these updates?
Yes, any pdf documents in the filing history as well as the business summary will be updated to display the operating name for Sole Proprietorships and Partnerships where appropriate.
Is there a maximum length for the legalName field?
The legalName field has a maximum length of 1000.
I don’t know if it’s possible to have parties other than the partners listed on the Business Summary - assuming it is, will only those entities with a roleType of Partner be listed in the LegalName?
For firms(SP/GPs), only role types of “Partner” or “Proprietor” will be displayed.
For Benefit and Cooperative companies, only role type of “Director” will be displayed.
Will the number of alternateNames entries with alternateNames.identifier the same as the business.identifier be exactly 1, for all scenarios?
A couple of things:
Benefit and Cooperative companies may not have alternateNames entries.
If a Benefit or Cooperative company does have alternateNames entries, there won’t be a match where business.identifier == alternateNames.identifier
Sole Proprietorships and Partnerships will always have one match where business.identifier == alternateNames.identifier. This is used to identify the primary operating name for the firm.
Examples of the different alternateNames scenarios should be available in the previously posted document outlining the proposed Business API legal name changes.
Your answers just bring up one more question and that is:
Given that the pdfs will be updated to display the operating name, do you have any pdf samples of how the new Business Summary will look? If so, could you forward samples of a Partnership and a Sole Prop?
Note: only need samples of the Business Summary pdf, not other documents.
Given that the pdfs will be updated to display the operating name, do you have any pdf samples of how the new Business Summary will look? If so, could you forward samples of a Partnership and a Sole Prop?
The business summary pdfs will essentially look the same as before from a user’s perspective.
For Sole Proprietorships and General Partnerships, the business summary and other filing documents will just be updated in the background to ensure the primary operating name is used where there are references to “Business Name”.
Just to be clear, I’ve provided two examples below to illustrate the section of the business summary that will be updated behind the scenes to reference the correct data.
I think I got it - so the pdfs will display the same information as before (the operating name) , but BC will update the backend mapping to no longer map from the legalName?
The solution will be in the sandbox for approximately 30 days, until the last week of June, when the solution will be released in production. We will communicate the exact date shortly before the release.
Please note: that the Business Search API is unaffected by this issue.
Going through the provided PDF, I have a couple of questions:
Do you have example entities for each scenario provided in the PDF in the sandbox environment? I tried using the same entities from the PDF in the sandbox environment and they didn’t exist.
Regarding translations, on page 7 of the PDF, there’s an example of a Sole Proprietorship containing 2 translations of their business name. However, what happens if the entity has more than 1 alternate name - for example 2 - and each alternate name has a translation. How do we determine which translation belongs to which alternate name?
How do we know if TRANSLATION3 is associated with ALTERNATENAME1 or ALTERNATENAME2?
If the interpretation of how 2 alternate names with translations will be returned is incorrect, do you have an example entity I could double check in the sandbox environment?
I’ve tried to find some businesses in the sandbox that match some of the scenarios in the PDF below.
As for name translations, the name translation is specific to the business being retrieved.
For example, BC1398021 is a Benefit company and the name translation entry is for BC1398021.
BC1398021 also operates as the operating name specified under the FM1016272 alternate entry. If a name translation existed, you would need to query FM1016272 specifically and reference the alternateNames field there.
Just a note that name translations are not currently supported for SPs & GPs at this point in time.
and that is:
