[Crm-sig] ISSUE Recording an E41 in RDF

bruseker at ics.forth.gr bruseker at ics.forth.gr
Tue Jan 16 16:26:43 EET 2018


Variants of this issue do come up often with people really trying to implement and indeed the lack of a consolidated implementation guide, to my knowledge, leads to incompatible implementations and this undermines the integration and interoperability we want to support. So I too think it should be raised as an issue.
------ Original message------From: Maria TheodoridouDate: Tue, Jan 16, 2018 14:14To: crm-sig at ics.forth.gr;Cc: Subject:Re: [Crm-sig] ISSUE Recording an E41 in RDF
    Dear all,    As being very much involved with mappings to the RDF      implementation of CRM I would benefit a lot from clear        guidance on the whole subject of "implementing an RDF        instantiation of the CRM" as Richard states.    In CAA2016 we presented some Methodological tips for mappings to      CIDOC CRM and among others we (a.k.a. Martin) claim the following:
              4.2    Common database fields: Appellations
        The RDF class rdfs:label and CRM class E41 Appellation are        alternative implementations for the same concept in RDF, a        human-readable name for the subject. So, for simplicity, when        mapping contemporary names into RDF, we suggest the use of        rdfs:label  tagged with a language attribute. The use of the E41        Appellation class is required only if there is need to assign        some additional properties to the Appellation such as properties        of use or attribution.
        
        Instances of E41 Appellation “are cultural constructs; as          such, they have a context, a history, and a use in time and          space by some group of users.” and thus E41 Appellation is        appropriate for historical names.
        
              Since then, I got several times questions related to this issue and    apparently there are a few ways to deal with it. One recent e-mail     mentioned "we were advised to use E55_Type > P1_is_indentified_by    > E41_Appellation > P3_has_note > E62_String" and I was    asked if this is the way to go.
    
    If I am not wrong, the different ways to approach this was the main    (probably the only) incompatibility between the Helculaneum data and    WissKI data in Tiblisi. George knows the details.
    
    Looking forward to official guidelines,
    
    Best
    Maria
    
    
    On 16/1/2018 1:12 πμ, Richard Light      wrote:
                    
      On 15/01/2018 19:52, Martin Doerr        wrote:
                            Right. We have often discussed it,          but I am not sure if we have written a guideline, and it is          not in the right place, or if we have only exchanged e-mails          about it.
          I put is as an issue, in case its new. The point is that we          cannot make rdf label a subproperty of p1.
                    More generally, I would argue that there should be clear guidance      on the whole subject of "implementing an RDF instantiation of the      CRM".  I was very pleased with the guidance for recording dates      which we recently worked on, and assumed that was just an outlier      which had been missed up to now.  If we are seriously expecting      implementors to produce RDF solutions which embody the CRM, we      must provide them with comprehensive and specific guidance - maybe      a range of implementation options.  In my understanding of it, the      problem areas are mostly at the "sharp end" where the actual data      comes in.
      
      Best wishes,
      
      Richard
      
               best,
          
          martin
          
          On 1/15/2018 6:33 PM, Richard Light wrote:
                          Hi,          It's perhaps telling that I even have to ask this question            at this stage in the game. 
                    I'm not sure how to encode a person's name in RDF in a            CRM-compliant manner.  It's an E41 Appellation, and is            linked to the person by a P1_is_identified_by property, I'm            assuming.  So far, so good.          However, it looks as though I have the choice of not            stating that it is an E41, or of connecting the E41 to its            string value via a property which is nowhere defined in the            CRM:              freeukgen:b65432#born a crm:E21_Person;
                    crm:P1_is_identified_by "Light, Thomas Edward" .          or:              freeukgen:b65432#born a crm:E21_Person;
                  crm:P1_is_identified_by [
                      a crm:E41_Appellation;
                      {has-string-value} "Light, Thomas Edward" ] .
          
          The CRM definition gives strings as examples of E41, which          implies that the first form is acceptable. However, my          instinct says that it is wrong to finesse the fact that it is          an E41 in this way.  If the E41 is to be expressed,          as in my second form, I would welcome advice as to what the          value of "{has-string-value}" should be.
          
          Whichever approach is correct, I am struck by the absence of a          primer which says, in straightforward terms, "this is how you          encode CRM concepts in RDF".  If it exists and I have simply          missed it, please point me in its direction and I will spread          the word ...
          
          Best wishes,
          
          Richard
          -- 
          Richard Light           
                    
          _______________________________________________Crm-sig mailing listCrm-sig at ics.forth.grhttp://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           |--------------------------------------------------------------        
                
        _______________________________________________Crm-sig mailing listCrm-sig at ics.forth.grhttp://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig            
      -- 
        Richard Light       
            
      _______________________________________________Crm-sig mailing listCrm-sig at ics.forth.grhttp://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig        
    -- Maria Theodoridou                  R & D Engineer                 Information Systems Laboratory & Centre for Cultural InformaticsInstitute of Computer ScienceFoundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)Science and Technology Park of CreteVassilika Vouton, P.O.Box 1385, GR-711 10 Heraklion, Crete, GreeceTel.: +30-2810-391731  Fax:  +30-2810-391638  E-mail: maria at ics.forth.grURL: http://www.ics.forth.gr/islORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4623-9186  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20180116/12eea1f3/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list