[Crm-sig] More consistent representation of "dual events"

martin martin at ics.forth.gr
Thu Dec 6 18:22:21 EET 2012


Dear Vladimir,

I am not sure if merging these classes is a good idea, and provides much 
help. We should
not forget that the CRM is an ontology and not a database schema. If you 
declare in ResearchSpace
a class "Part Transfer" , you are completely CRM compatible. (See also 
definition of CRM compatibility!) If a class instance is instance of one 
or two classes is a concern of local optimization, not of the conceptual 
logic.

The case is not so analogous to Acquisition of Move as it may seem. 
Business transactions are by nature
agreements between parties, but taking something from an object does not 
mean integrating it into another one per default, nor is the combination 
of part removal and addition something that would require a particular 
unity of activity, as buying/selling.

In general, Part Removal can be taking a sample from a mummy, cutting 
the nose of the Sphinx and
whatever. So, I do not see which "meaningless" situation you refer to. 
For instance, I may have a
part of an ancient Greek temple, I know when it was stolen, and by whom, 
but not from which temple.
I may have a reference of things being stolen from a particular temple, 
but don't know what has been removed. I may have reference of some 
things being stolen from from temples. I may remove a stone of the 
common wall of two(!!) buildings.

"Meaningful Situations" are typically bound to extremely special 
contexts relative to the wide scope of the CRM. It is the power of the 
CRM to foresee such "exceptions". Please not, that the CRM foresees 
quantifications for P112. So, some of the situations you describe are 
situations of lack of knowledge, not situations of the reality the CRM 
refers to. For instance, E80 Part Removal requires that something is 
diminished, but this may be unknown.

At information integration time, restrictions to "force you to express 
only meaningful situations" are
a very bad idea. Data have to come in correct already, or providers must 
change the source,
which is rarely in a CRM form. Consistency constraints have to be 
enforced at data entry time, where
possible situations are better known.

Best,

Martin


On 6/12/2012 4:48 μμ, Joshan Mahmud wrote:
> In addition to Vladimir's question we use these classes always together and I'm not sure when they would be separated.
>
> What would be really helpful is in addition to the comments in the ontology CIDOC provided a range of examples of each predicate and class from a real world 'meaningful' situation to a set of RDF triples.  This would demystify how CRM and should be used.
>
> Thanks
> Josh
>
>
>
> On 6 Dec 2012, at 14:23, "Vladimir Alexiev" <vladimir.alexiev at ontotext.com> wrote:
>
>>> What would the generic case mean? For example:
>>> removed=<object1>, diminished=<collectionA>, added=<object2>, augmented=<collectionB>
>> And what do these cases mean?
>> Part Removal: removed=<object1>, diminished=<collectionA>, diminished=<collectionB>
>> Part Removal: removed=<object1>
>> Part Removal: diminished=<collectionA>
>> Part Removal:
>>
>> CRM allows you to express situations, but it doesn't force you to express only meaningful situations.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Crm-sig mailing list
>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
> _______________________________________________
> 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        |
  Research Director             |  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)   |
                                                              |
                N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,             |
                 GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece               |
                                                              |
              Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl           |
--------------------------------------------------------------



More information about the Crm-sig mailing list