[Crm-sig] Preferred Identifier vs Appellation vs Image
kai.sommer at fh-potsdam.de
Mon Sep 16 20:16:18 EEST 2013
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
this is my first post on this list and I want to reply to an email
from Vladimir Alexiev he sent on November 20. last year (2012) .
I'm new to CRM (an ontologies), but I have to describe conservation
objects (artifacts) with CRM.
Because I'm new, I have some understanding questions. One is similar
to the original from Vladimir. – So I will ask it here.
Am 20.11.2012 11:57, Vladimir Alexiev wrote:
> However, in any system that displays search results, it's important
> to know two other preferred attributes of an object:
> 1. Preferred image: to be shown as thumbnail in a result list or
> 2. Preferred label (name/title/appellation): to be shown as short
> textual representation of the object
> 2. Following LOD best practice, we try to make rdfs:label for every
> I wonder why CRM standardizes 0 but not 1 & 2.
> Let's say we have these attributes and want to add that they are
> <obj> P1_is_identified_by <obj/id/1>;
> P102_has_title <obj/title/1>;
> P138i_has_representation <obj/image/1.jpg>
Can someone explain (maybe by an example) me how (and when) to use the
following properties correctly, please.
I read the comments for this properties, but it's not really clear or me.
Q1: Can P1_is_identified_by be used instead of rdfs:label (like
Vladimir wrote above)?
Q2: Is it correct to use P1_is_identified_by for any (internal or
abstract) identifier, like an inventory number or so? (If yes, this
identifier is a literal an not a new object …)
Q3: Is P48_has_preferred_identifier usable as the 'real' title/name of
an artefact? – The comment says "to identify an instance […] at the
time this property was recorded". Does "recorded" means the first
name/title I know?
Q4: What is P102_has_title for? – I can use P1 and P48 … :-/
Finally I have a generally question:
If I express a relation (i.e. P1; see example above) in RDF wit CRM.
Do I have to express the inverse relation (P1i_identifies) in the
object (<obj/id/1>) explicit or is the inverse relation
always/automatically (inplizit) there?
At the moment I think – excuse my lack of knowledge – that the answer
of the last question makes the difference of CIDOC-CRM and Erlang-CRM.
– In CIDOC-CRM I have to make the inverse relations explizit and in
Erlang-CRM it is implizit.
→ Is it true …!?
Excuse me for asking such ('stupid') questions (with such a rusty
Don't hesitate to tell me if this is not the right list for asking
such questions and show me the right one! :)
Fachhochschule Potsdam | http://www.fh-potsdam.de
Informationswissenschaften (FB5) | http://iw.fh-potsdam.de
Master Informationswissenschaften | 3. Semester
sig: 1E6B 06F5 EBE5 6FE2 | pubkey: http://ma.ximi.se/fhpkey
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Crm-sig