[Crm-sig] On issue 203

Øyvind Eide oyvind.eide at iln.uio.no
Thu Oct 17 19:54:26 EEST 2013

Dear all,

Issue 203: It was clear in Stockholm that in the case of digitisation, representation is more adequate than incorporates.

Thus, there are other situations which must be covered by "incorporation" as it was described in issue 203. In what way will the new property be different from P106 is composed of (forms part of)?

The scope note of P106:  "This property associates an instance of E90 Symbolic Object with a part of it that is by itself an instance of E90 Symbolic Object, such as fragments of texts or clippings from an image."

The scope note of R14 incorporates (is incorporated in) from FRBRoo: 

"This property associates an instance of F22 Self-Contained Expression with an instance of F2 Expression that was included in it and that is a realisation of an independent work. The incorporated expression may be self-contained or fragmentary.

This property makes it possible to recognise the autonomous status of the incorporated expression, which was created in a distinct context, and can be incorporated in many distinct self-contained expressions, and to highlight the difference between structural and accidental whole-part relationships between conceptual entities.

It accounts for many cultural facts that are quite frequent and significant: the inclusion of a poem in an anthology, the re-use of an operatic aria in a new opera, the use of a reproduction of a painting for a book cover or a CD booklet, the integration of textual quotations, the presence of lyrics in a song that sets those lyrics to music, the presence of the text of a play in a movie based on that play, etc."

The difference between the two is the "autonomous status" of the incorporated expression.

Thus, in the last Waldseemuller map example from issue 205, what is shown in the image is a watermark. Thus, this is not part of the map as a geometrical expression but rather a part of the structure of the paper on which the map was printed. One could say that the Waldseemuller document incorporates the map as well as a number of occurrences of the watermark. 

According to the article cited in Issue 203, there is also an issue of incorporation at play between different levels of symbols, e.g., between letter level and word level.

Although there is clearly a difference between "incorporation" and "composed of", it is not clear to me if this is a nuance which needs to be captured in museum documentation systems. Thus, I have not been able to decide whether there is a need to introduce "incorporation" into CRM. It will take further study of the evidence and its relevance to museum documentation to find that out.

Kind regards,


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list