[Crm-sig] ISSUE: P55 should have domain E18 Physical Thing

Vladimir Alexiev vladimir.alexiev at ontotext.com
Fri Mar 9 11:24:55 EET 2012

Dear Martin,

>>> P55 excludes: Physical Feature, Site, Man-Made Feature,
>>> an-Made Thing, Collection. What is the justification?
>> The idea is that features cannot change location, therefore there is no
>> current location.
> To me this is a bit counter-intuitive: a permanent location is not
current? I'd say it's
> current for eternity :-)
> P53 is not a "permanent" location, it is any location the thing ever had,
in particular the
> current one.
> Please do not confuse "former OR current" with "former AND current"!

I have not confused OR and AND ever since mommy told me "you can't have an
icecream and a coke, but you may pick one" at age 8 :-).
I am speaking about P55, not P53.
For me the inability to state that an immovable thing "P55 has current
location" is counter-intuitive.
If CIDOC considers it an appropriate limitation, then the reason should be
stated in the scope note of P55 to avoid confusion.


>> I think "at the time the property was recorded" should be changed to "at
>> Since we don't know the time the property was recorded, this makes P55
kind of
>> useless...
> If you have a database or an inventory record saying "current location",
> it can only be at the time the record was created.

Not if the DB has a "business date" field. Then the date of recording
becomes irrelevant.

> It is absolutely impossible to conclude from such a statement in
> a museum record what holds "at present". How would you do that? 

You convert all records to P53, but the last one to P55.
If a new record comes in later, you replace the previous P55 with P53 and
create a new P53.
This embodies a closed world assumption and is non-monotonic, 
but P55 has a closed-world flavor anyway, 
because normally there can be only ONE current location.

Under your interpretation, you'd convert all records to P55 because they
were current at the time they were made.
But that makes P55 the same as P53, therefore useless.

The current scope note refers to an UNKNOWN past moment ("the time the
property was recorded"), which I think is useless.
I propose to change it to a known and important although moving moment ("at
present"), and let data migrators worry how they will fulfill that.

Regards! Vladimir

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list