[Crm-sig] Relations between information objects

Christian-Emil Ore c.e.s.ore at edd.uio.no
Sun Jan 13 23:34:25 EET 2008

Dear all,
I think Martins's suggestion is very good. It is pretty abstract, and 
one may need some time to adjust to the idea that the motif of a 
manuscript page shows features of a (abstract text), but why not?

I am currently adjusting a transcript of the codex for the St Olaf saga 
from a facsimile edition. I am not quite sure that my understanding of 
the transcript is close to any common abstract information object except 
the one in my own head, though.


On 11.01.2008 22:34, martin wrote:
> Dear Dieter,
> I suggest to use "P130 shows features of" and P130.1 kind of similarity: "Transcript".
> I'd regard your manuscript as a E33 Linguistic Object in any case, it can be in addition
> a Visual Item, but I don't think tiny decorations would make this classification necessary.
> Martin
> Dieter Köhler wrote:
>> Trying to record the structure of a manuscript 
>> and its digital reproductions with CIDOC CRM 
>> 4.2.2 I come across the following problem.  I 
>> have a digital facsimile and a normalized 
>> transcription of a manuscript.  The facsimile 
>> consists of scans of the individual pages of the 
>> manuscript; the transcription is normalized by 
>> correcting misspellings, skipping deleted 
>> passages and rearranging some others (according 
>> to insertion marks in the manuscript).
>> I understand that
>> (A) the physical manuscript is an E84 Information Carrier
>> (B) a digital scan is an E73 Information Object 
>> (more precisely an E36 Visual Item)
>> (C) a transcription is an E73 Information Object 
>> (I am not sure whether I can use E33 Linguistic 
>> Object here, because some paragraphs contain tiny 
>> non-linguistic illustrations within the textual sequence)
>> (D) a particular file on the hard disk containing 
>> a scan is an E84 Information Carrier
>> (E) a particular file on the hard disk containing 
>> a transcription is an E84 Information Carrier
>> The following relations apply:
>> (A) P128 carries (B)
>> (A) P128 carries (C)
>> (D) P128 carries (B)
>> (E) P128 carries (C)
>> (B) and (C) are distinct E73 Information Objects, 
>> but nevertheless the transcription (C) is an 
>> interpretation of the visual clues of (B), 
>> expressed for example in: "The vertical stroke in 
>> the first line is the word 'I'."
>> I think it would be useful to have a predicate in 
>> CIDOC-CRM to indicate that one Information Object 
>> is not identical with but derived from 
>> another.  The closest predicates in meaning are 
>> 'P67 refers to' and 'P138 represents'.  However, 
>> it seems that neither is really accurate here.  Any ideas?
>> Dieter Köhler
>> Dr. Dieter Köhler, M.A.
>> Wissenschaftlicher Assistent
>> Institut für Philosophie und
>> Studienzentrum Multimedia
>> Universität Karlsruhe (TH)
>> University address:
>> Institut für Philosophie der
>> Universität Karlsruhe (TH)
>> D-76128 Karlsruhe
>> Phone:       +49-(0)-721-608-2149
>> Direct Line: +49-(0)-721-608-7743
>> Fax:         +49-(0)-721-608-3084
>> _______________________________________________
>> Crm-sig mailing list
>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list