[Crm-sig] Technique and product of technique
steads at paveprime.com
Mon Jul 14 10:13:25 EEST 2014
A useful way to think of E29 is to regard it as the instructions you would
follow in order to perform some task. These could be codified in a document
or exist as a set of "tribal knowledge" in either the performers of the task
or in the observers of the results of the task. So for example we, as
curators, may observe that vase 27 was made using the same technique that
all "blue-slipped ware" vases are made with. So this recognisable way of
making "blue-slipped ware" vases is an E29 Design or Procedure, even though
we do not have a document that tells us how it is done.
The difference between this and a E55 Type linked by P32 used general
technique (was technique of) is that we (as documenters) recognise the
homogeneity of the resulting products and wish to characterise this as being
caused by a singular methodology that is itself then a topic in our
Hope this helps
Tel +44 20 8668 3075
Mob +44 7802 755 013
E-mail steads at paveprime.com
LinkedIn Profile http://uk.linkedin.com/in/steads
From: Crm-sig [mailto:crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr] On Behalf Of Athanasios
Sent: 10 July 2014 19:10
To: Dominic Oldman; crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Technique and product of technique
Yes that example is clear.
But I am still confused about the phrase: "A schema of the products that
result from their application." in E29. The product of the application of
the technique is not a technique. Shouldn't this phrase be removed from
E29's note? What was the reason to include this phrase?
On 10/07/14 16:02, Dominic Oldman wrote:
> Im not quite sure what you mean
> But P56_bears feature can then be used with a Man-Made Feature E25
> which can have a P2_has_type which could be a thesuarus term.
> Explore P56 on this example
> Techniques are usually applied from a production event usinmg
> *From:* Athanasios Velios <a.velios at gmail.com>
> *To:* crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 10, 2014 11:13 AM
> *Subject:* [Crm-sig] Technique and product of technique
> Hello list,
> We are compiling a thesaurus of bookbinding terms and we would like
> some advice on this:
> The CRM says E29 Design or Procedure can be:
> "1. A schema for the activities it describes 2. A schema of the
> products that result from their application."
> Does this mean that one can use E29 Design or Procedure to describe a
> feature or an object? Am I misinterpreting the purpose of E29?
> Two examples:
> gilding (technique) -> gilding (feature) tooling (decorative
> techniques of covers) -> tooling (embossed feature on cover)
> The question came up when considering a number of techniques/features
> terms. AAT seems to often define these separately, and I think this
> should be the case, but some people may feel this is redundant after
> looking at E29 and since the definitions of a given pair of
> technique/feature are almost identical.
> Thank you in advance for your help.
> -- Dr. Athanasios Velios
> University of the Arts London
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
More information about the Crm-sig