[Crm-sig] P107.1 and P144.1, a negative vote

martin martin at ics.forth.gr
Mon Nov 24 13:14:32 EET 2008


Dear Christian-Emil,

Christian-Emil Ore wrote:
> Dear all,
> I will write a little note about the singleton and the groups. I will 
> just point out that the current scope note of group, states explicitly 
> that a group must have two or more members. The scope note does not say 
> anything about time since the persistent items are timeless. Thus I 
> assume that an office like the presidency of US is a group.
> 
> There is also another aspect with group, "act collectively or in a 
> similar way due to any form of unifying relationship". The question is 
> if all related persons have this property.?

That's a very good point! I would take this as a clear distinction of a role as
an "office" in a Group from a pure relationship.

Should we just drop "two or more" ? Because an office may start with one
person, but be desolved before a second person would come in?


Best,

martin


> Chr-Emi
> 
> Scope note
> This class comprises any gatherings or organizations of two or more 
> people that act collectively or in a similar way due to any form of 
> unifying relationship
> 
> 
> On 21.11.2008 18:30, martin wrote:
>>
>>
>> c.e.s.ore at edd.uio.no wrote:
>>> Dear Martin and all
>>> I still think it is artifical because one in this way use groups as
>>> extensions of thought predicates. This is of course already introduce by
>>> the use of group as a way to simulate/implement  interpersonal 
>>> relations. I am not quit sure I buy the argument that this is the 
>>> ontological nature.
>>> It also moves much of the deduction from the CRM "proper" to the type
>>> system.
>>>
>>> The most important thing for "my" user group is the short cut and not 
>>> the
>>> elaborated path, because in written source one usually only get
>>> information about the relation and nothing more.  I am interested to see
>>> how the shortcut is done in this set approach
>>>
>>> So I will no withdraw my suggestion until convinced or down voted.
>>>
>>> Ad voting in the SIG. I think secret voting like in this case is not a
>>> good patrh to follow. I  prefer an open dabate.
>>
>> Of course, I didn't want to count the vote, but I found the idea 
>> interesting,
>> always in the spirit of keeping CRM a core model.
>>
>> If no other votes come in until Monday, I regard the issue as accepted.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Martin
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian-Emil
>>>
>>>> Dear Christian-Emil,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this is the solution. Of course you may argue, that it is more
>>>> indirect.
>>>> P107 is both, individual member and subgroup membership. So, there is a
>>>> subgroup
>>>> membership. My question, you may express the problem with "very
>>>> artificial", is actually
>>>> what the ontological nature, the substance of the roles are. If they 
>>>> are
>>>> positions,
>>>> personae, they would be not so much relations between an Individual and
>>>> the Group, but a
>>>> structure of the Group, and would be better expressed by 
>>>> specializations
>>>> of Groups and
>>>> their parts. If we regard them as relational, they are better 
>>>> expressed by
>>>> subproperties
>>>> or 107.1 . If we keep 107.1, and regard nevertheless the model of
>>>> singleton Groups as valid,
>>>> then, p107.1 would represent shortcuts over singleton Groups.
>>>>
>>>> Opinions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> c.e.s.ore at edd.uio.no wrote:
>>>>> Dear all
>>>>> First of all it is difficult to comment a solution which is not
>>>>> presented
>>>>> but just referred to. I assume that this unknown suggested solution is
>>>>> as
>>>>> follows:
>>>>>
>>>>> Assume a master and an apprentice: An actor can be the only member 
>>>>> of a
>>>>> singleton group. The relationship master.-apprentice can be 
>>>>> expressed as
>>>>> a
>>>>> group having the master-singleton and the apprentice-singleton as
>>>>> members.
>>>>> The type of the singleton-group can express the relation the members
>>>>> have
>>>>> in the master-apprentice group. If this is the solution it is of 
>>>>> course
>>>>> possible but very artificial like epicycle models of  the planet 
>>>>> orbits.
>>>>>
>>>>> I may be blind, but I dont find any sub group property in the model.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Christian-Emil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just received a contribution voting against P107.1 and P144.1,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with the argument that following our definition of Group, it can be
>>>>>> also
>>>>>> an office or
>>>>>> position. So, we could model master and apprentice as subgroups - no
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> for any extension.
>>>>>> Also, this could consistently describe changing positions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comments welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>   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               |
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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               |
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 

--------------------------------------------------------------
  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