[Crm-sig] Re.: [crm-sig] cidoc 4.2 in owl + alignment to DOLCE-Ultralight PLEASE RESPOND

martin martin at ics.forth.gr
Wed Jun 13 13:29:34 EEST 2007


Dear Detlev, Aldo,

I would much appreciate such an effort. We at FORTH would clearly participate.
Who else would like to participate? PLEASE RESPOND.
I will put the idea on the issues list, and suggest to discuss details in
the CRM-SIG meeting Dec. 4-7 in Nuremberg.

Best,

martin

Detlev Balzer wrote:
> Aldo Gangemi wrote:
> 
>>Dear CRM specialists, I'd like to point you at a new OWL version of
>>CIDOC 4.2, which I have produced for other purposes. It is based on the
>>official RDFS version, and besides the semantic translation, it only
>>includes a guess about the datatypes used in some CIDOC properties.
>>Please refer to file documentation for details (I've put it in a ftp
>>area of my lab, but if you find it useful, please copy it where
>>appropriate:
>>
>>http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/CIDOC/cidoc_v4.2.owl
> 
> 
> I like the idea of expressing alignments between ontologies
> using OWL constructs such as equivalentClass.
> However, a straight automatic translation from RDFS to OWL misses
> the opportunity to formalize some of the (textual) definitions
> from the CIDOC CRM that cannot be expressed in RDF Schema.
> 
> Wouldn't it be useful to include some more definitions (explicit
> and implicit) from the reference model? As an example, pairs of
> inverse properties are identified by the letters B and F appended
> to the numerical part of the property name. This is mnemonics for
> humans, but not easily processed by machines. However, it can
> easily be made processable by using the owl:inverseOf statement.
> There are further examples such as the disjointness of some
> classes (explicitly mentioned in the text) or the transitivity of
> some properties (e.g. P120F.occurs_before). One could go even further
> and declare P57F.has_number_of_parts as owl:FunctionalProperty,
> assuming that no instance of E19.Physical_Object can consist of
> different numbers of parts at a given time.
> 
> How does the SIG think about a coordinated effort that would
> eventually result in an official OWL representation of the model?
> Some work has already been done and I think it shouldn't be too
> hard to reach a consensus on what to express in OWL language
> constructs, and what to leave out.
> 
> Best wishes,
> Detlev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
> 


-- 

--------------------------------------------------------------
  Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
  Principle Researcher          |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
                                |  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr |
                                                              |
                Center for Cultural Informatics               |
                Information Systems Laboratory                |
                 Institute of Computer Science                |
    Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)   |
                                                              |
  Vassilika Vouton,P.O.Box1385,GR71110 Heraklion,Crete,Greece |
                                                              |
          Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl               |
--------------------------------------------------------------




More information about the Crm-sig mailing list