[Crm-sig] reified association vs sub-event

martin martin at ics.forth.gr
Wed Oct 15 22:12:08 EEST 2014


Dear Simon,

Yes I agree.

I think in general, "role" can be 4 kinds of things, (or even more):
1) A permanent property of a person = E55 Type.
2) An office with distinct identity and unity from the individual 
fulfilling the role = E74  Group
3) A incidental relationship between an Actor and an Activity  = P14.1 
and all the discussion here.
4) A functional specification of the default interaction between members 
of a structured group,
currently in the CRM expressed via membership P107.1. One could argue, 
that "membership" is a state, as such a kind of Temporal entity in its 
own right. If a type of such as state is equivalent to P107.1, is 
ontologically debatable.

3) and 4) and even other things boil down to the need to represent 3ary 
relations. I think we should stop discussing half-hearted work-around as 
if the problem would not exist.

Cheers,

Martin

On 15/10/2014 9:22 ??, Simon Spero wrote:
>
> On Oct 15, 2014 11:45 AM, "Richard Light" <richard@ 
> <mailto:richard at light.demon.co.uk>light.demon.co.uk 
> <mailto:richard at light.demon.co.uk>> wrote:
>
> I. Properties of properties.
>
> > If you do this, the subproperty simply takes the place of the 
> original more generic property in an RDF expression of the statement, 
> and the result is a meaningful RDF triple. If, instead, you try to 
> express "property of a property" as RDF, you find that you are trying 
> to construct a triple with a predicate as its object; something RDF 
> does not allow.
>
> This paragraph may confuse some people so I would add some clarifications.
>
> 1. It's perfectly ok to make property assertions whose subjects are 
> properties, in both RDF and in OWL 2. These assertions are about the 
> property itself, rather than any particular use of the property.
>
> 2. It is possible to make property assertions whose value is a 
> property, in both RDF and OWL. For example one could state that a 
> class has subclasses that are partitioned based on the value of the 
> specified property.
>
> 3. In OWL 2 it is possible to add annotations to a property assertion 
> axiom. These annotations are only about the particular act of 
> assertion, rather than what is being asserted.
>
> 4. In RDF it is possible to make assertions about an RDF statement by 
> using the RDF reification mechanism. RDF reification is generally 
> considered to be pretty bad (a reified statement does not even entail 
> the original statement).
>
> II. Subproperties vs. Reified associations
>
> 1. Using subproperties instead of reified entities makes it easier to 
> use off-the-shelf reasoners.  For example, if there are constraints 
> that apply to a particular role, it may require creating one or more 
> new subclasses to which the constraints may be applied (these can, of 
> course, be anonymous, but that may not make things easier to use).
>
> Additionally there may be optimizations for retrieval of subproperties 
> that are not otherwise available.
>
> 2. Using reified associations labelled with concepts from a version of 
> SKOS supporting hierarchical relationships does not automatically 
> entail that hierarchy for the associations.
>
> III.  Roles and subevents.
>
> It is possible to treat subevents as a subclass of roles, but the 
> typical motivation would be if the sub-event was an event in its own 
> right. See eg. http://www.cyc.com/tutorials/roles-and-event-predicates
>
> IV. Other meanings of "Role" in applied ontology.
>
> Some schools of thought use the term Role to refer to things like a 
> being a Producer. Because some person may not always be or have been a 
> Producer, they do not consider it appropriate for that individual to 
> be an instance of Producer.
> DOLCE and related work tend to follow this approach.
>
> An alternative is to treat the person-as-producer as a subpart of the 
> person, or to treat class membership as holding in an interval.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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           |
--------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20141015/e2d20182/attachment.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list