[Crm-sig] begin_of_the_begin /end_of_the_end is excluded from time range?

Robert Sanderson RSanderson at getty.edu
Thu May 9 20:31:55 EEST 2019


Thanks Florian, Nicola!

Should the example be updated (and thus we must all update our implementations) or the specification to match the example which everyone seems to do in practice?
My proposal would be to do the latter, in the face of the current ambiguity.

What has everyone else done in this situation? 3 data points is interesting, but still anecdotal.

(And I’m not going to mention leap seconds that would make the end of some years 23:59:60 instead of 23:59:59, which would be solved by an exclusive end date)

Rob

From: Nicola Carboni <nic.carboni at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 10:27 AM
To: Florian Kräutli <fkraeutli at mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de>
Cc: Robert Sanderson <RSanderson at getty.edu>, crm-sig <Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>, Adam Brin <ABrin at getty.edu>, Greg Williams <GWilliams at getty.edu>
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] begin_of_the_begin /end_of_the_end is excluded from time range?

Dear all,

I also follow the range as appear in the data linked by Florian, so:

crm:P82a_begin_of_the_begin “1586-01-01T00:00:00”^^xsd:date ;
crm:P82b_end_of_the_end  “1586-12-31T23:59:59”^^xsd:date ;
I agree that the example should be harmonised with the text ( which I assume is more authoritative). Thank you for pointing out about the problem


Best,


Nicola

Sent from my iPad

On 9 May 2019, at 10:04, Florian Kräutli <fkraeutli at mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de<mailto:fkraeutli at mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de>> wrote:
Dear Rob,

Not having read the guidelines as attentively as you I usually implement P82a/b suggesting that the begin and end date are both included in the range.

For example, here's the date related to a book published in 1586:

http://sphaera.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/id/item/7e241bb5-41e3-4e08-9ab1-547a93fe6b3d/publication/date

I think this is readable as a confidence interval of the book having been published somewhen in 1586, lacking better ways to express the level of accuracy in date datatypes.

Best,

Florian



On 8. May 2019, at 19:50, Robert Sanderson <RSanderson at getty.edu<mailto:RSanderson at getty.edu>> wrote:


Dear all,

I admit I made the rookie mistake of assuming that the P81a/b and P82a/b properties followed the typical temporal pattern of an inclusive beginning and an exclusive end.
Or using interval notation: [begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end)

Thus if you know that an event happened sometime in 1586, the begin of the begin would be 1586-01-01T00:00:00 and the end of the end would be 1587-01-01:00:00:00.

However, http://www.cidoc-crm.org/guidelines-for-using-p82a-p82b-p81a-p81b seems to clarify that both are exclusive.

> "P82a_begin_of_the_begin" should be instantiated as the latest point in time the user is sure that the respective temporal phenomenon is indeed *not yet* happening.
> "P82b_end_of_the_end" should be instantiated as the earliest point in time the user is sure that the respective temporal phenomenon is indeed *no longer* ongoing.

And thus (begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end)

Meaning that the begin of the begin would need to be 1585-12-31T23:59:59 such that midnight on January first is included in the range, and the end of the end would be midnight of January first, 1587.

However, in the following paragraph it says:

>  … e.g. 1971 = Jan 1 1971 0:00:00. Respectively, for “P82b_end_of_the_end” the implementation should “round it up”, e.g. 1971 = Dec 31 1971 23:59:59.

Which would mean that both ends were *included* in the range.
And thus [begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end]

So …

Enquiring minds that need to implement this consistently would like to know which is correct ☺


Many thanks!

Rob




_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20190509/0f76927e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list